I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 15 September 2021

5.00pm

Skype for Business

This meeting will proceed via Skype for Business.

As required under the COVID-19 Response (Urgent Management Measures) Act 2020, either a recording of the meeting or a written summary will be published on the Auckland Council website.

 

 

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

 

Deputy Chairperson

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

 

Members

Makalita Kolo

 

 

Christine O'Brien

 

 

Papaliitele Peo

 

 

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

 

 

Harry Fatu Toleafoa

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Janette McKain

Democracy Advisor

 

9 September 2021

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 262 5283

Email: janette.mckain@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

8.1     Deputation - New Zealand Police                                                                       5

8.2     Deputation - Tongan Youth Organisation                                                         6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Governing Body Member Update                                                                                9

12        Local Board Leads and Appointments Report                                                         11

13        Chairpersons Report and Announcements                                                              17

14        Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local and Multi-Board Round One 2021/2022 grant allocations                                                                                                                                       23

15        Approval for new private road names and renaming of Cessna Place, Mangere. 31

16        Approval for two new private road names at 96, 100 & 102 Walmsley Road, Mangere.                                                                                                                       41

17        Adoption of the 2021 Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan                                                                                                                                       49

18        Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan                         55

19        Public feedback on proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015    65

20        Public feedback on proposal to make a new Public Trading Events and Filming Bylaw 2022                                                                                                                    71

21        Public feedback on proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015                                                                                                                    77

22        Draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi                                                                                                                             83

23        Local board feedback on Auckland Transport's Parking Strategy Review          93

24        Local board feedback on the kerbside refuse charging mechanism policy       155

25        Addition to the 2019-2022 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board meeting schedule   161

26        Local board resolution responses, feedback and information report                165

27        Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Workshop Notes                                                  173

28        Governance Forward Work Calendar                                                                      179

29        Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 


1          Welcome

 

2          Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 18 August 2021, including the confidential section, as a true and correct.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.

 

7          Petitions

 

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

 

8          Deputations

 

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

8.1       Deputation - New Zealand Police

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Matt Srhoj, Inspector, Area Commander West would like to discuss policing issues in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      thank Matt Srhoj, Inspector, Area Commander West for his attendance and presentation.

 

 

 

8.2       Deputation - Tongan Youth Organisation

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

 

1.       Betty Soi from the Tongan Youth Organisation would like to discuss a proposal from their Fanongo Talanoa with the board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      thank Betty Soi for her attendance and update.

 

 

9          Public Forum

 

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

 

(a)        The local authority by resolution so decides; and

 

(b)        The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

 

(i)         The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

 

(ii)        The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

 

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

 

(a)        That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

 

(i)         That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

 

(ii)        the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

 

(b)        no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Governing Body Member Update

File No.: CP2021/12520

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       A period of time (10 Minutes) has been set aside for the Manukau Ward Councillors to have an opportunity to update the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board on regional matters.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal reports from Cr Alf Filipaina and Cr Efeso Collins.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Local Board Leads and Appointments Report

File No.: CP2021/12523

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To allow the local board members an opportunity to present verbal and written updates on their lead roles, such as relevant actions, appointments and meetings.

2.       To make any appointments to vacant positions.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3.       Members have an opportunity to update the board on their activities as topic area leads.

4.       The table below outlines the current leads and alternates for topic areas of local board business meetings and organisations on which the board is represented through a formal appointment.

Topic Area

Lead

Alternate

Infrastructure and Environmental Services

 

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Arts, Community and Events (including libraries)

Christine O’Brien

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

Parks, Sport and Recreation and Community Facilities

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

Christine O’Brien

Local planning, housing, and heritage – includes responding to resource consent applications on behalf of board

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

1st Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

2nd Harry Fatu Toleafoa

Transport

Makalita Kolo

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Economic development

Harry Fatu Toleafoa

1st Christine O’Brien

2nd Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Youth, Children, Seniors and Uniquely Abled    

Harry Fatu Toleafoa

1st Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo

2nd Christine O’Brien

Landowner Consents (excluding filming)

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

Landowner Consents Filming

Christine O’Brien

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

Events (receive staff notifications of areas that may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk)

Christine O’Brien

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

Liquor Licences Hearings

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Resource Consent (proceed as a non-notified, limited notified or fully notified application)

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

Resource Consents (notified hearings)

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

Area Plan Working Group

MOLB

All board members

OPLB

Apulu Reece Autagavaia,

Dawn Trenberth

 

LGNZ (Local Government New Zealand

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

 

 

 

 


Organisation / Initiative

Lead

Alternate

Community Impact Forum for Kohuora Corrections Facility

Makalita Kolo

 

Mangere Bridge BID

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

 

Mangere Town Centre BID

Makalita Kolo

 

Mangere East Village BID

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

 

Otahuhu Business Association

Christine O’Brien

 

South Harbour Business Association BID

Harry Fatu Toleafoa

 

Auckland Airport Community Trust for

Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group

Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich

 

Te Pukaki Tapu O Poutukeka Historic Reserve & Associated Lands Co-Management Committee

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

 

Ambury Park Centre

Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo

Christine O’Brien

Mangere Mountain Education Trust               

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Tamaki Estuary Environmental Forum

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Maori input into local board decision-making political steering group

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Ōtāhuhu Portage Project Steering Group

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

The Southern Initiative (TSI) Steering Group

Lemauga Lydia Sosene

Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Otahuhu Town Hall Community Centre Incorporated Society

Makalita Kolo

 

Harry Fatu Toleafoa

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal and written reports from local board members.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Member O'Brien report

15

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Chairpersons Report and Announcements

File No.: CP2021/12704

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To give the Chairperson an opportunity to update the local board on any announcements and for the local board to receive the Chairperson’s written report.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal update and written reports from the local board Chair.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Chairpersons Report

19

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local and Multi-Board Round One 2021/2022 grant allocations

File No.: CP2021/12766

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To fund, part-fund or decline applications received for Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local and Multi-Board Grants Round One 2021/2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grants Programme 2021/2022 as presented in Attachment A. The document sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the board.

3.       This report presents applications received in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Grants Round One 2021/2022 (Attachment B) and Multi-Board Grants Round One 2021/2022 (Attachment C).

4.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $165,000.00 for the 2021/2022 financial year.

5.       Twenty-one applications were received for Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Grants Round One, requesting $150,072.63. Fifteen applications were received for Multi-Board Grants Round One 2021/2022, requesting $76,559.28.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      agree to fund, part-fund, or decline each application in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Grants Round One 2021/2022, listed in the following table:

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

LG2209-101

Congregational Christian Church Samoa (EFKS) Mangere Bridge Board

Sport and recreation

Towards refreshments, official's fees, and prize money for the annual Sport Day event on 18 December 2021

$2,500.00

LG2209-102

Pacific Advance Secondary School

Sport and recreation

Towards equipment and accommodation for the biannual Waka Ama Nationals Regatta event in Lake Karapiro Cambridge and Lake Tikitapu Rotorua

$5,000.00

LG2209-104

New Settlers Family and Community Trust

Community

Towards venue hire, material costs, tutor and admin fees to run their Ethnic Women Art and Craft Programme in Mangere East Community Centre for 30 weeks from the start of October 2021 to the end of March 2022

$6,000.00

LG2209-107

Asthma New Zealand Incorporated

Community

Towards the wages of mobile asthma nurse educator to visit clients in their houses to provide free smoking cessation sessions

$10,000.00

LG2209-109

Fungataua Educational & Cultural Trust

Arts and culture

Towards cost of project leader, two facilitators, and food to run free professional voice lessons twice a week for eight weeks

$17,000.00

LG2209-115

Otahuhu Historical Society Inc

Historic Heritage

Towards a technology system to allow digitisation of archives

$3,786.98

LG2209-116

Disruptive Car Club Inc.

Events

Towards costs such as stage, DJ, artists, and videography for Hardpark in the Hood event at the Mangere Town Centre in April 2022

$5,000.00

LG2209-118

Ambury Park Centre Inc.

Community

Towards three months supply of hay to feed therapy horses in Ambury Park Centre

$6,500.00

LG2209-119

Peace Chapel Christian Fellowship Trust

Community

Towards cost such as camp site, transport, and resource packs to run Ignite Youth Leadership Camp in October at the Kokako Lodge

$10,000.00

LG2209-121

TOA Pacific Inc

Events

Towards the venue hire and catering costs of International Older Peoples' Day Celebration on October 2021 in Mangere War Memorial Hall

$3,078.00

LG2209-122

Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust

Community

Towards Youthline clinical supervision, face-to-face counselling, and promotion and communications of Attitude

$5,000.00

LG2209-123

Auckland Paraplegic and Physically Disabled Association inc

Sport and recreation

Towards camera and backdrop to capture events and produce marketing material

$2,500.00

LG2209-124

Mangere Baptist Church

Community

Towards costs such as coordinator wages, petrol vouchers, food, speaker, and stationery to run 10 Christians Against Poverty (CAP) Money courses in various venues from October 2021 - September 2022

$7,669.15

LG2209-125

Mountains to Sea Conservation Trust - Experiencing Marine Reserves

Community

Towards the full cost of running one event alongside Friends of the Farm including kayak hire and for Māngere Kayak Day + Mountain View Kaitiaki in Māngere Bridge, Mountain View school, local pool, and Goat Island

$10,000.00

LG2209-127

The Red Book Agency

Community

Towards materials and resources for the pop-up Career Clinic in Mangere Town Centre Library

$5,000.00

LG2209-128

Sir Douglas Bader Intermediate School

Arts and culture

Toward laptop charging stations so that students in Bader Intermediate School can access their curriculum

$2,747.70

LG2209-129

Te Whakaora Tangata

Community

Towards the delivery costs of two Family Restoration Courses in October-November 2021 and January-February 2022

$5,000.00

LG2209-130

Communicare CMA (Ak) Inc

Community

Towards the cost of wages for the paid part-time coordinator of the Māngere Friendship Centre

$5,140.80

LG2209-131

Life Education Trust Counties Manukau

Community

Towards educational resources, insurances, and teachers' salaries for the delivery of health and well-being programme to 1,127 students aged 5-13 in St Joseph's Otahuhu, Otahuhu Primary School, and Otahuhu Intermediate

$20,000.00

LG2209-132

Fe'unu Koula Global Academy of Tongan Dance, Arts & Culture

Arts and culture

Toward costumes towards 'A Glimpse of the Friendly Isles of Tonga' production in Mangere Central Community Hall

$8,000.00

LG2209-134

Island Base Trust

Arts and culture

Towards the contribution towards studio hire time, venue hire, travel, staffing the finale production of the event, and video editing costs for the Music Youth Mentoring Programme with Mangere Central School

$10,150.00

Total

 

 

 

$150,072.63

 

 

 

 

 

b)      agree to fund, part fund, or decline each application in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Multi-Board Grants Round One 2021/2022, listed in the following table:

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

MB2022-101

The Auckland Softball Association Incorporated

Sport and recreation

Towards a proportion of the annual operating expenses of the Auckland Softball Association

$6,000.00

MB2022-113

Big Buddy Mentoring Trust

Community

Towards operational costs including wages, rent, transport, and equipment to recruit, screen, and train up to 50 more Auckland men to be volunteers (Big Buddies) to Auckland boys who do not have a father in their life

$12,000.00

MB2022-120

The Operating Theatre Trust

Arts and culture

Towards gift a seat theatre tickets and transport costs for low decile school and early childhood centre children between October 2021 and May 2022

$4,498.00

MB2022-121

The Student Volunteer Army Foundation

Community

Towards the Student Volunteer Army (SVA) programme volunteer project in various primary schools including the costs of a school kit, from 31 October 2021 to 1 August 2022.

$2,100.00

MB2022-123

Babystart Charitable Trust

Community

Towards 60 babystart boxes, baby clothing, care items, courier, logistics and storage costs.

$3,452.00

MB2022-126

New Settlers Family and Community Trust

Community

Towards the Persian New Year event at Long Bay Regional Park on 10 January 2022.

$2,000.00

MB2022-135

Age Concern Auckland Incorporated

Community

Towards counselling services for older adults between 1 October and 30 June 2022

$2,000.00

MB2022-138

Graeme Dingle Foundation Auckland

Community

Towards salaries for two Kiwi Can Programme Coordinators from 3 January 2021 to 22 July 2022.

$6,000.00

MB2022-139

Habitat for Humanity Northern Region Limited

Community

Towards the "Winter Warmer and Healthy Home Intervention Programme" including volunteer costs, items for the packs and co-ordination costs.

$4,000.00

MB2022-144

Auckland Deaf Society Incorporated

 

Towards the Christmas event including two sign language interpreters, entry fees for 74 adults and children to Butterfly Creek and donations for volunteers on 11 December 2021

$409.78

MB2022-145

Eduquest

Community

Towards venue hire and project costs for the healthy meal planning programme for women from ethnic communities at Mangere Old School Hall from 4 October to 30 October 2021.

$2,500.00

MB2022-147

Guardians of our Children Charitable Trust

Community

Towards Parental Disputes workshops "Make Them Proud" including facilitation, handouts and venue hire at Orakei Community Centre from 1 October 2021 to 30 September 2022.

$14,625.00

MB2022-152

Road Safety Education Trust

Community

Towards the Road Safety Programme including wages for the programme co-ordinator, national manager and support staff for programmes between 1 October 2021 to 30 September 2022.

$2,000.00

MB2022-155

Sisters United Trust

Community

Towards a camp for young women at Carey Park Christian Camp Henderson from 15 to 17 October 2021 including accommodation and bus transport.

$9,174.50

MB2022-158

CNSST Foundation, formerly known as Chinese New Settlers Services Trust

Arts and culture

Towards the Community Connection Programme at the training centre in Manukau from 30 October 2021 to 23 July 2022.

$5,800.00

Total

 

 

 

$76,559.28

 

Horopaki

Context

6.       The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world-class city.

7.       The local board grants programme sets out:

·   local board priorities

·   lower priorities for funding

·   exclusions

·   grant types, the number of grant rounds, and when these will open and close

·   any additional accountability requirements.

8.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grants Programme 2021/2022 as presented in Attachment A. The document sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the board.

9.       The community grant programmes has been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, and community networks.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10.     The aim of the local board grant programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report. 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

11.     The Local Board Grants Programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups for projects that support and enable community climate action.

12.     Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by local residents in a locally relevant way. Local board grants can contribute to expanding climate action by supporting projects that reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts.

13.     Examples of projects include local food production and food waste reduction; increasing access to single-occupancy transport options; home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation; local tree planting and streamside revegetation; and educating about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

14.     The focus of an application is identified as arts, community, events, sport and recreation, environment, or heritage. Based on the focus of an application, a subject matter expert from the relevant department will provide input and advice.

15.     The grants programme has no identified impacts on council-controlled organisations and therefore their views are not required.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

16.     Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

17.     Staff will provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.

18.     A summary of each application received through 2021/2022 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local and Multi-Board Grants Round One is provided in Attachments B and C.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

19.     The local board grants programme aims to respond to the council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Māori. Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Unit has provided input and support towards the development of the community grant processes.

20.     Five organisations applying to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board, Local and Multi-Board Grants, Round One have indicated that their project targets Māori or delivers positive outcomes for Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

21.     The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grants Programme 2021/2022 as presented in Attachment A. The document sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the board.

22.     The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $165,000.00 for the 2021/2022 financial year.

23.     Twenty-one applications were received for Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Grants Round One, requesting $150,072.63. Fifteen applications were received for Multi-Board Grants Round One 2021/2022, requesting $76,559.28.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

24.     The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

25.     Following the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board allocating funding for Round One Local and Multi-Board grants, grants staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Grant Programme 2021/2022 (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Application Summary of Local Board Grant Round One 2021/2022 (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Application Summary of Multi-Board Grants Round One 2021/2022 (Under Separate Cover)

 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Rikka Barbosa - Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Rhonwen Heath - Head of Rates Valuations & Data Mgmt

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Approval for new private road names and renaming of Cessna Place, Mangere.

File No.: CP2021/13338

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board to name two new private roads, being jointly owned access lots (COALs), created by way of subdivision developments at Cessna Place, Mangere. The extension of Cessna Place to form a loop road back on to Bader Drive also requires the road type to be changed to Cessna Crescent.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (the Guidelines) set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. The Guidelines state that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider / developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

3.       On behalf of the developer and applicant, Mike Greer Homes, agent Marion Humphrey of Kāinga Ora has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

4.       The proposed road name options have been assessed against the Guidelines and the Australian & New Zealand Standard, Rural and Urban Addressing, AS NZS 4819:2011 and the Guidelines for Addressing in-fill Developments 2019 – LINZ OP G 01245 (the Standards). The technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been met and the proposed names are not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity. Mana whenua have been consulted in the manner required by the Guidelines.

5.       The application (as lodged) sought to name four new private roads off Cessna Place, but Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that only two require naming.  The proposed names for the two new private roads are:

COAL 1:

·    Ara Reti (applicant preferred)

·    Ara Erana (alternative)

COAL 4:

·    Ara Kataraina (applicant preferred)

·    Ara Arihi (alternative).

6.       Due to the extension of Cessna Place to form a loop road, it is also proposed that road type be changed to Cessna Crescent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      approve the following road names for the new private roads created by way of subdivision at Cessna Place, Mangere in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60352023, LUC60352024, SUB60352025 for COAL 1 and BUN60367623 for COAL 4);

i)        Ara Reti for the new private road – COAL 1; and

ii)       Ara Kataraina for the new private road – COAL 4; and

b)      approve the renaming of Cessna Place to Cessna Crescent in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

 

Horopaki

Context

7.       The Māngere Development, a project led by the Urban Development Team at Kāinga Ora, will see 10,000+ new healthy homes delivered to Māngere over the next 15 years. In the Māngere West Neighbourhood, Mike Greer Homes is currently constructing a number of new homes (including three level walk-up apartments) for sale as follows:

·   29 Open Market terrace homes

·   18 Kiwibuild apartments

·   12 Open Market apartments.

8.       As part of this development, four COALs are being created as outlined on Attachment A. Of those four COALs, COAL 1 and COAL 4 require new road names. COAL 2 does not need to be named, as those properties will be numbered off Cessna Place. COAL 3 does not need to be named, as it will have a base number off Cessna Place with hotel style numbering for the apartments.

9.       In accordance with the Standards, any road including private ways, COALs, and right of ways that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.

10.     For this development it has been confirmed by LINZ that only two of the new COALs require road names because they serve more than five lots. The other two COALs do not need to be named as they obtain access and be addressed from existing road frontages. This can be seen in Attachment B, where the COALs that require names are highlighted in yellow.

11.     The redevelopment of Cessna Place has resulted in its extension and reconguration into a loop road. The council’s road naming standards require that the road name accurately reflect its road type. It is therefore proposed that Cessna Place be changed to Cessna Crescent. All but one of the owners of the properties presently addressed off Cessna Place are owned by Kāinga Ora. The owner of number 9 Cessna Place was consulted by the applicant in accordance with the road naming policy and their response is discussed in subsequent sections of this report.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12.     The Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across Auckland. The Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

13.     The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

·   a historical, cultural, or ancestral linkage to an area; or

·   a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or

·   an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

14.     The applicant’s agent, Kāinga Ora approached Te Ākitai o Waiohua (mana whenua for the area) and was gifted the following names:

Proposed names

Meaning (as described by Te Ākitai o Waiohua)

(Applicant preferred order)

·   Reti

·   Kataraina

·   Marara

The relevant context for these names – three sisters and loved Kuia of the Wilson Takaanini whanau/ Te Ākitai Waiohua.

 

The first two names have been selected for COALs 1 and 4 respectively, with the third being an alternative in the event that the first two were not acceptable.

(Alternatives)

·   Erana

·   Arihi

These were two further three alternative names also gifted by Te Ākitai.

 

15.     All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by the council’s Subdivision Specialist team to ensure that they meet both the Guidelines and the Standards in respect of road naming.

16.     NZ Post has advised that the name “Marara” is in use in Kumeu, so it unlikely to be accepted by them. The technical standards are considered to have been met for the other preferred and alternate names, and duplicate names are not located in close proximity.  It is therefore for the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context and in accordance with the delegation.

17.     LINZ has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable for use at this location.

18.     The proposed COAL names will be preceded by “Ara” meaning Road. The extension of Cessna Place to form a loop road requires the road type to be reconsidered. Principle 1 of the Guidelines directs that the road type should be one that accurately reflects the form, layout and type of road being named. Appendix 1 of the Guidelines contains the following relevant descriptions:

Road Type

Abbreviation

Description

Open Ended

Cul-de-sac

Close

Cl

Short, enclosed road.

 

Y

Court

Ct

Short, enclosed road, usually surrounded by buildings.

 

Y

Crescent

Cres

Crescent shaped road, especiallywhere both ends join the same thoroughfare.

Y

 

Loop

Loop

Road that diverges from and re-joins the main thoroughfare.

Y

 

Place

Pl

Short, sometimes narrow, enclosed road.

 

Y

 

19.     Principle 5 of the Guidelines ‘strongly discourages’ the renaming of roads unless there are compelling issues or reasons to support a change. Legitimate issues that can prompt the renaming of a road includes the redesign of the road and a change to traffic flow, which is the situation for Cessna Place.

20.     Mana whenua were consulted in line with the processes and requirements described in the Guidelines. Additional commentary is provided in the Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori section that follows. The applicant (an agent of Kāinga Ora) owns all but one of the properties fronting Cessna Place.

21.     Having been consulted about the proposed change the road type from ‘Place’ to ‘Crescent’, the owner of number 9 Cessna Place is of the view that there is no compelling reason why its name needs to be changed after having been named ‘Cessna Place’ for over 60 years. They are of the view that “If it’s not broke don’t fix it” and just because Cessna Place has been modernised and extended, this does not warrant a name change.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22.     The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23.     The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on other parts of the council group. The views of council controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

24.     This report seeks the decision of the local board and the decision is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25.     To aid local board decision making, the Guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua, particularly through the resource consent approval process, and the allocation of road names where appropriate. The Guidelines identify the process that enables mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications and in this instance, the process has been adhered to.

26.     In this case, Jeff Lee (Tete Consultancy) put forward the suggested names on behalf of TAWWTI as three sisters and loved Kuia of the Wilson Takānini whanau / Te Ākitai Waiohua.

27.     On 14 May 2021 mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

·    Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki (Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Tribal Trust)

·    Ngāti Maru (Ngāti Maru Rūnanga Trust)

·    Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

·    Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

·    Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

·    Ngāti Tamaterā (Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust)

·    Ngāti Te Ata (Te Ara Rangatu o Te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua)

·    Te Ahiwaru – Waiohua (Makaurau Marae Māori Trust)

·    Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

·    Te Patukirikiri (Te Patukirikiri Incorporated)

·    Ngāti Tamaoho

28.     Makaurau Marae Māori Trust advised that the gifted names were considered by Te Ahiwaru governance after being informed by Te Akitai that their naming options would be Te Waiohua inclusive though these are specific Tuupuna whaea of Te Akitai. Te Ahiwaru subsequently confirmed on 9 June 2021 that it had no further recommendations on naming and supports those submitted for mana whenua by Te Akitai Waiohua.

29.     By the close of the consultation period, no other responses, comments, or feedback were received from any other mana whenua groups. Dependant on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

30.     This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

31.     The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.

32.     The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33.     There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34.     Approved road names are notified to LINZ and recorded on its New Zealand wide land information database. LINZ provides all updated information to other users, including emergency services.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Location Map

37

b

Site Plan

39

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Approval for two new private road names at 96, 100 & 102 Walmsley Road, Mangere.

File No.: CP2021/13417

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board to name two new private roads, being two commonly owned access lots (COALs), created by way of a subdivision development at 96, 100 and 102 Walmsley Road, Mangere.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (the Guidelines) set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. The guidelines state that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider /developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

3.       On behalf of the developer and applicant, Vincent Luo of Precise Homes Ltd, agent David Cloete of Aspire Consulting Engineers Ltd has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

4.       The proposed road name options have been assessed against the Guidelines and the Australian & New Zealand Standard, Rural and Urban Addressing, AS NZS 4819:2011 and the Guidelines for Addressing in-fill Developments 2019 – LINZ OP G 01245 (the Standards). The technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been met and the proposed names are not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity. Mana whenua have been consulted in the manner required by the Guidelines.

5.       The proposed names for the new private roads at 96, 100 and 102 Walmsley Road, Mangere are:

ROAD 1:

·    Hari Lane (applicant preferred)

·    Wald Lane (alternative 1)

·    Whakamiharo Lane (alternative 2)

ROAD 2:

·    Aumarire Lane (applicant preferred)

·    Walm Lane (alternative 1)

·    Matariki Lane (alternative 2).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      approves the following road names for the new private roads created by way of subdivision at 96, 100 and 102 Walmsley Road, Mangere, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60344324).

i)        Hari Place for the new private road – Road 1

ii)       Aumarire Lane for the new private road – Road 2.

Horopaki

Context

6.       Resource consent reference BUN60344324 was issued in August 2020 for the construction of 44 new residential freehold units and two commonly owned access lots (COAL).

7.       Site and location plans of the development can be found in Attachment A & B.

8.       In accordance with the Standards, any road including private ways, COALs, and right of ways, that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.

9.       Therefore, in this development, the new COALs require a road name because they serve more than five lots. This can be seen in Attachment B, where the COALs that require names are highlighted in yellow.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10.     The Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across Auckland. The Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval

11.     The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Maori names being actively encouraged:

·   a historical, cultural, or ancestral linkage to an area; or

·   a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or

·   an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

12.     The proposed names have been chosen by the applicant to represent the local natural environment and plants. Te Reo Maori names are preferred to be used to support the area’s Maori identity. 

Proposed name

Meaning (as described by applicant)

ROAD 1

Hari Lane

(applicant preferred)

Means “joy, happiness, elation, euphoria, gladness, delight, joyfulness” in Te Reo Maori.

Wald Lane

(alternative 1)

Means “Forrest” in German.

Whakamiharo Lane

(alternative 2)

Means “joy, wonderful” in Te Reo Maori.

ROAD 2

Aumarire Lane

(applicant preferred)

Means “peace, harmony, peacefulness” in Maori.

Walm Lane

(alternative 1)

Walm is an archaic word referring to “gushing or boiling water”.

Matariki Lane

(alternative 2)

Means “an open cluster of stars” in Te Reo Maori.

 

13.     All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by the council’s Subdivision Specialist team to ensure that they meet both the Guidelines and the Standards in respect of road naming. The technical standards are considered to have been met and duplicate names are not located in close proximity.  It is therefore for the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context and in accordance with the delegation.

14.     Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable for use at this location.

15.     ‘Lane’ is an acceptable road type for the new private roads, suiting the form and layout of the COALs.

16.     LINZ and mana whenua were consulted in line with the processes and requirements described in the Guidelines. Additional commentary is provided in the Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori section that follows.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17.     The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18.     The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on other parts of the council group. The views of council controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

19.     This report seeks the decision of the local board and the decision is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

20.     To aid local board decision making, the Guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua, particularly through the resource consent approval process, and the allocation of road names where appropriate. The Guidelines identify the process that enables mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications and in this instance, the process has been adhered to.

21.     On 4 August 2021 mana whenua were contacted by the applicant, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

·    Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki (Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Tribal Trust)

·    Ngāti Maru (Ngāti Maru Rūnanga Trust)

·    Ngāti Tamaterā (Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust)

·    Ngāti Te Ata (Te Ara Rangatu o Te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua)

·    Ngāti Whanaunga (Ngāti Whanaunga Incorporated)

·    Te Ahiwaru – Waiohua (Makaurau Marae Māori Trust)

·    Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

·    Waikato – Tainui (Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated)

·    Ngāti Tamaoho

·    Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei (Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Trust)

·    Te Kawerau a Maki (Te Kawerau Iwi Settlement Trust & Tribal Authority)

22.     By the close of the consultation period, responses only received from Ngāti Whanaunga and Waikato-Tainui. Ngāti Whanaunga confirmed that the names were acceptable to them. Waikato-Tainui defer to mana whenua to take the lead. No other responses, comments, or feedback were received. Depending on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua. It is therefore considered that adequate consultation with local mana whenua groups has been undertaken.

23.     This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24.     The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the council.

25.     The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26.     There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27.     Approved road names are notified to LINZ and recorded on its New Zealand wide land information database. LINZ provides all updated information to other users, including emergency services.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Location Map

45

b

Site Plan

47

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

Adoption of the 2021 Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan

File No.: CP2021/12755

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To adopt the 2021 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board recognises the contribution sport and active recreation makes to community wellbeing and is aware that the facilities enabling participation require investment. As budgets are constrained, investment into sport and active recreation facilities needs to be prioritised to maximise community outcomes.

3.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board resolved to develop a Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan to provide guidance for future decisions by council and third-party funders.

4.       The purpose of a Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan is to:

·    review the existing network of sports facilities

·    assess community needs and gaps in provision

·    identify and prioritise opportunities for investment in sports facilities

·    identify opportunities to enable more community access to non-council facilities.

5.       The development of the 2021 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan required engagement with sport and active recreation organisations to assess community needs and identify potential projects. These potential projects have been assessed and prioritised against the investment principles from “Increasing Aucklanders Participation in Sport – Investment Plan 2019-2039”.

6.       The 2021 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan (the Plan) is now presented for adoption in Attachment A.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      adopt the 2021 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan provided in Attachment A.

Horopaki

Context

 

7.       Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board recognised that there are limited funds to contribute to maintaining and developing sport and recreation facilities, and therefore investment will need to be prioritised. This can be achieved through the development of a Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan.

 

 

8.       The development of a Sport and Recreation Facilities Plan is an item on the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board 2020/2021 work programme (Resolution MO/2020/109):


ID #2239 - Develop a Sport and Recreation Facilities Plan for the Mangere-Otahuhu local board area, including a review of the existing sports facility network and prioritisation of community needs and gaps in provision, to guide future decisions around local board investment.

The plan is jointly funded by $25,000 LDI funding carried forward from 2019/2020 and Sport NZ funding.

9.       The methodology used to develop the 2021 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan included: 

a)       assessing the needs of sport and recreation groups, determining current facility capacity, and identifying opportunities for the redevelopment or renovation of existing facilities. Opportunities to maximise the use of existing facilities were also identified.

b)       identifying opportunities to increase public access to facilities owned by third parties, including schools and churches.

c)       prioritising projects identified in accordance with criteria that focuses on the outcomes council and the local board are seeking to achieve. 



10.     Sport and active recreation facilities plans assist progressing many of council’s strategic priorities, particularly Auckland Plan 2050, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2020 and Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan.


Auckland Plan 2050

Outcome: Belonging and participation

Direction 2: Improve health and wellbeing for all Aucklanders by reducing harm and disparities in opportunities

Focus area 7: Recognise the value of arts, culture, sports and recreation to quality of life:

·      Participating in sport and recreation is a major contributor to our quality of life, health and general wellbeing.

·      Participation can have a positive impact on social cohesion - drawing people from different backgrounds together - and educational outcomes.

·      Participation helps children and young people to develop life skills and confidence and life-long, healthy living habits.

·      Providing a wide range of recreation and sport opportunities enables all Aucklanders to be active more often.

·      Access to and the ability to participate in sport activities are not equitable across the region. Common barriers are distance, affordability, location across the region and physical access, particularly for people with disabilities.




 

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2020

Outcome two: We are building well-connected, engaged and active communities

Objectives & Key initiatives

Community facilities meet our diverse needs, enhancing our lifestyles, culture, and wellbeing

Deliver our park renewals, concept plans and Centre Park masterplan to meet increasing sports and recreational needs

Outcome five: Our children and young people grow and succeed

Objectives & Key initiatives

Children and young people feel safe and free to express themselves with well-designed spaces

·      Renew our playgrounds and recreational facilities to better serve our children and young people at all stages including those who are differently-abled or have faith-based needs

·      Cultivate hubs where youth can gather, look out for each other, and develop skills for the future

Our community recognises and supports aspirations and development of children and young people

·      Invest in opportunities to develop young people’s talents and celebrate their achievements

Develop and maintain quality sport, recreation and arts spaces, while building local groups’ capacity to support our children and young people

 

 

Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan

·      Auckland offers recreation and sport opportunities that inspire and enable all Aucklanders to be more active, more often, have fun and live healthy lifestyles. Aucklanders’ involvement in recreation and sport as participants, spectators, administrators or volunteers contributes to strong and connected communities.

·      Recreation and sport are an essential part of Auckland, making our city an attractive place to live, work, visit and invest in.

Priority areas

·      More Aucklanders living physically active lives through participation in informal physical activity, recreation and sport

Access to open spaces, harbours, coastlines, waterways and a fit-for-purpose network of facilities that enable physical activity, recreation and sport at all levels.

 

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11.     The development of the Plan included a robust process where information was collected and analysed. Evidence was gathered through an online survey, interviews and forums with club, school and church representatives. Supplementary information was collected via site visits, site inspections and the analysis of secondary data such as code facility plans, council plans, council policies, strategies, demographics and population projections.

12.     The Plan aligns with council’s targeted approach to investment into sport, and recognises how facility investment can enable increased participation of council’s target population groups.

13.     The Plan provides a stocktake of existing sport and recreation facilities as well as an assessment of the network of facilities serving today’s communities. The Plan also provides population projections to predict the likely demand from future communities and acknowledges the challenges of transport connections.

14.     Engagement with sport and active recreation users and facilitators has identified 53 potential projects which will enable increased activity, increased participation in sport, and better utilisation of existing facilities. The projects include a mix of club owned, council owned and third party owned facilities.

15.     Each project has been assessed against the four investment principles identified in “Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport – Investment Plan 2019–2039”. These four investment principles are equity, outcome-focused, financial sustainability and accountability. The assessment was carried out by the consultant engaged to prepare the plan and staff from Community Leisure Management (CLM) Community Sport and council. The assessment process ranked the projects and allocated levels of priority.

16.     The Plan will remain relevant as it is a “living document” which will be updated every few years.

Options considered

17.     The options considered are to not adopt the Plan, request that additional information be included in the Plan, or adopt the Plan.

Options considered

Comment

Not adopt the Plan

This is not recommended as the Plan provides the strategic direction the local board was seeking and was funded and supported by the board.

Request that additional information be included in the Plan

This option is considered unnecessary as a high level of community engagement occurred, providing sufficient evidence to meet the Plan’s objectives. There is no additional allocated budget to continue gathering information. A refresh of the Plan in the future is contemplated.

Adopt the Plan

This option is RECOMMENDED. The Plan provides the information sought by the local board and gives a clear direction to guide future decisions. The Plan meets the agreed scope and has used a thorough methodology.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18.     There will be no impact on direct greenhouse gas emissions from the adoption of the Plan.

19.     The effects each identified project may make on greenhouse gas emissions and the effect climate change could have over the lifetime of the facility will be assessed and will inform the investigation and design stage of individual projects.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20.     Auckland Council staff, including personnel within the Community Facilities Department, Service Investment and Programming Department, and Parks and Places team were consulted throughout the project and contributed to the data provided within the Plan.

21.     The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

22.     The views of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board were received at workshops held on 22 April 2020, 2 September 2020, 25 November 2020, 12 May 2021 and 23 June 2021. These workshops provided direction in the development of the overall Plan, particularly when developing the project scope, and assisting in providing clarity when interpreting the information collated.  

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23.     The Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau captures what Māori in the region said was important to them and provides a framework for understanding Māori development aspirations and monitoring progress towards desired cultural, economic, environmental and social outcomes. The Māori Plan recognises the value in active participation in sports and recreation.

24.     The inactivity rate of Māori in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu is 29%, compared to the overall inactivity rate of all people in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu at 31.8%. The 2021 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan aims to increase the level of activity through improving facilities, or access to facilities.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25.     There are no financial implications arising from adopting the Plan.

26.     Financial implications arising from progressing an identified project will be assessed at the time the progression of projects are recommended.  

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27.     There is a slight risk that clubs and organisations may interpret the adoption of this Plan as an endorsement of a project or as a commitment to fund a project. This is explicitly addressed in the Plan’s introductory section; “It does not guarantee funding support for projects”.

28.     The risk of the Plan becoming obsolete as the community grows and changes will be mitigated through the Plan being refreshed every few years.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

29.     If the 2021 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan is adopted the following steps will be taken:

Distribute the Plan to sport and recreation organisations in the local area, mana whenua, Sport NZ, known third party funders, Regional Sports Organisations and National Sports Organisations (where applicable).,Using the Plan as a reference, provide advice to the local board with respect to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board 2021/2022 Customer and Community Services work programme item #702 “Sport and active recreation facilities grants” [MO/2021/82].

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

2021 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Martin Devoy - Sport and Recreation Advisor

Authorisers

Dave Stewart - Manager Sport & Recreation

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan

File No.: CP2021/13247

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek support for the draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua -Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The number and diversity of older Aucklanders is growing, and this creates challenges and opportunities for improving the age-friendliness of our environment, infrastructure, and services now and in the future.

3.       Older people experience barriers to participation across all areas of life.

4.       The draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua Action Plan (Action Plan) is our commitment to supporting older Aucklanders to participate fully in their communities and is provided as Attachment A.

5.       It is a region-wide, cross-sector plan that commits the council, council-controlled organisations (CCOs) and sector partners to improve outcomes for older Aucklanders through the delivery of tangible and meaningful short, medium and long-term actions. 

6.       To develop the Action Plan, staff listened to over 3,000 Aucklanders who shared their thoughts on what is needed to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau/Auckland. Previous research and community engagement results are provided in Attachments B and C.

7.       Engagement with kaumātua and whānau to hear what is important to Māori led to the development of our unique Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework. The Framework combines the WHO domains with Te Ao Māori concepts and reflects the bicultural identity of Aotearoa and the diversity of Tāmaki Makaurau.

8.       Many activities within the plan will benefit people of all ages and what we do now to improve older Aucklander’s accessibility and quality of life will also benefit future generations.

9.       The Action Plan is constrained by actions needing to be delivered within existing resources, or as and when new funding can be secured. Greater or quicker impact could be possible in the future if budget is not such a limitation.

10.     By working together council and cross-sector partners can, however, leverage resources to achieve greater collective impact and prioritise efforts to where it is needed most.

11.     Over time the plan will help create an age-friendly lens that becomes embedded in the way council and partners design and deliver services and infrastructure. This will result in ongoing and incremental change that makes a tangible impact on the lives of older people.

12.     Community engagement on the draft Action Plan is underway and will be completed in September 2021.  

13.     The final Action Plan will be reported to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee for adoption in November 2021.

14.     The adopted Action Plan will enable Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland to join the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities.

 

 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      support the draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan provided as Attachment A.

Horopaki

Context

15.     Auckland Council has a strong interest in the wellbeing of older people, because:

·   Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland is home to New Zealand’s largest population of older people[1] - this number will more than double between 2018 and 2043

·   of the current 65+ population, most are well-placed but some face hardship and this will increase[2] 

·   diversity in life stage, needs and abilities, culture, language, living situation and financial stability affect how older people contribute and participate in the community.

16.     In view of this, in July 2018 Auckland Council’s Environment and Community Committee resolved to become an Age-friendly City and seek membership to the World Health Organisation’s Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities (ENV/2018/88).

17.     The network includes cities that are committed to supporting each other and creating inclusive and accessible environments for all people to enjoy. It identifies eight interconnected domains of urban life that contribute to improving the wellbeing and participation of older people.

18.     To obtain membership to the network, council has led a process to develop a region-wide cross-sector Action Plan that will deliver over 80 actions to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland. 

19.     To develop the Action Plan, staff listened to over 3,000 Aucklanders who shared their thoughts on what is needed to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

20.     The Action Plan has been created to ensure infrastructure, activities and services are developed or adapted to respond to the diverse needs of Auckland’s growing and increasingly more diverse ageing population.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The problem/opportunity

21.     Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s older population is growing faster than any other age-group and faces challenges and barriers to participation across all areas of life.

22.     Our older people are taonga, and deserve to live full, meaningful lives where they can participate and are valued for the contribution they make to our communities. 

Our services and infrastructure need to respond and adapt to older peoples’ diverse needs

23.     Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s growing and increasingly diverse ageing population means we need short-term as well as longer-term, system-level solutions to ensure older people can actively participate in their communities now and in the future.

24.     The burden on the environment, infrastructure and on services such as healthcare will expand exponentially as the older population grows to a projected 432,800 Aucklanders by 2043. To enable older people to live active and full lives in Tāmaki Makaurau, we need to ensure infrastructure, activities and services are developed or adapted to respond to their diverse needs.

Older Aucklanders told us they face challenges related to accessibility across all areas including public space, buildings, transport, and housing options

25.     Older people told us they need:

Older Aucklanders can find it difficult to access information and to keep up to date with technology

26.     Older people told us they need:

Older people can feel invisible, disconnected, and discouraged from taking an active role in their community

27.     Older people told us they need:

Our response to the problem/opportunity

28.     The development of Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan provided in Attachment A.

29.     This is a cross-sector action plan that responds to the diverse needs and aspirations of older Aucklanders to improve their wellbeing and quality of life; and to make Tāmaki Makaurau/Auckland a more age-friendly region.

Strengths

A cross-sector action plan will deliver collective impact in an innovative, sustainable, and equitable way

30.     Auckland Council has worked with a range of organisations and communities who are active in advancing the wellbeing of older Aucklanders including:

·   nineteen organisations with different specialities, such as health, recreation, and housing

·   regional and local organisations, ensuring a breadth of reach across communities.

31.     Together we identified and developed actions that will address the challenges and opportunities raised by older Aucklanders. This approach:

·   enables collaboration between the council, aged-sector organisations, and communities

·   creates opportunities to leverage resources and deliver greater collective impact over time.

·   develops an action platform for organisations to build upon

·   encourages interest and participation from other organisations to be part of delivery

·   recognises that improving the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland relies on many different groups and agencies playing their part

·   ensures the delivery of actions that have impact for older Aucklanders of all ethnicities, abilities, and beliefs.

32.     It is anticipated that having a shared vision for an age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau will continue to build momentum within the organisations who are responsible for delivering actions.

33.     The intent is that over time an age-friendly lens will become embedded in the way council and partners design and develop services and infrastructure across the region.

34.     The result of this will be ongoing action and incremental change that makes a tangible impact on the lives of older people.

The Action Plan includes a mixture of over 80 new and existing actions

35.     Impact will be delivered through a mix of short, medium, and long-term actions. They are spread across all ten domains, but not equally.

36.     Some domains have more actions than others, for example the Housing Domain has fewer actions than the Respect and Social Inclusion Domain. This is because some things, such as refurbishing Haumaru Housing units take time and money to implement whereas supporting community-led social activities can use existing resource or may build upon activities that are already happening.

37.     Council’s actions are primarily focused in the areas where most council services are provided. These are:

·   Te Taiao; council maintains outdoor spaces and facilities for the community,

·   Respect and Social Inclusion; council hosts region-wide and local community events and activities that foster belonging and inclusion for diverse Aucklanders, and

·   Communication and Information; council informs communities about what is happening and offers support through libraries and community centres.

It has a unique Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework to reflect our bicultural foundations 

38.     Staff developed the Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework in response to feedback from kaumātua.

39.     The framework provides a holistic way to frame the plan that integrates the WHO domains with Te Whare Tapa Whā- a Māori wellbeing framework - and Te Ao Māori values.

40.     It includes two additional domains and expanded another:

·   Culture and Diversity and Kaumātua and Kuia domains were added to reflect Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s diversity and bicultural foundations.

·   The WHO Domain of Outdoor Spaces and Buildings was expanded to become Te Taiao, representing the natural and built environment.

41.     The framework is unique to Tāmaki Makaurau. It ensures the actions within the plan are meaningful, achievable, and impactful for older Aucklanders.

42.     The framework will continue to be used to guide how we collectively improve and evaluate the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

The Action Plan will have a wider community and intergenerational impact

43.     The actions within the plan will benefit older people and others in the community now and, in the future. For example, ensuring all buses are accessible will benefit small tamariki (children) and disabled community members.

44.     Many activities within the plan benefit people of all ages and stages and what we do now to improve older Aucklander’s accessibility and quality of life will also benefit future generations.

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Constraints and limitations 

It will take time to see the full, long-term impacts of the Action Plan

45.     The Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan will deliver impact but that will happen over time.

46.     Some actions are small and local and will not have significant or regional impact. However, there is opportunity for these local activities to be expanded as the age-friendly vision and plan gains traction.

47.     Some actions will be delivered immediately or are in progress, others will take time. For instance, making roads, buildings and parks more accessible will be achieved over time, subject to the roll-out of relevant capital works and renewal programmes.  

Council, CCOs and partner organisations are constrained by the financial impact of COVID-19 and operating within existing budget and resources

48.     The Action Plan has been developed on the basis that everyone is operating in a constrained financial environment and actions will be delivered within existing resources.

49.     The current assumption is that:

·   no additional budget will be available

·   where new funding is required, it will need to be reprioritised from elsewhere, secured through grants, or considered through budget-setting processes.

50.     Consequently, the first one to five years of the action plan focus on existing or new actions that are easier and more affordable to carry out within existing budgets.

51.     There is potential for this to change as the Action Plan evolves and if more funding becomes available in the medium to long term (5-10 years).

Success relies on cooperation, ongoing commitment, and resources to support collaboration

52.     The Action Plan relies on the dedication and commitment of council and partner organisations working together to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland:

·   many of the partner organisations are community-led with limited capacity and dependant on ongoing public funding

·   larger entities and agencies (including government and council departments) may have competing priorities

·   success is dependent on all parties continuing to prioritise age-friendly outcomes and delivering the actions they have developed.

53.     Resources will also be needed to support sector collaboration. It will take time and effort to facilitate organisations working together and supporting each other to build an age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau. 

54.     As part of council’s commitment to the plan, council staff will play a key backbone role in keeping the Action Plan alive, bringing partners together, and monitoring implementation and impact.    

Community views

55.     Staff undertook extensive community engagement in 2019-2020 to ensure the voices of diverse older Aucklanders were at heart of the plan. We developed surveys, held workshops across the region, hui with kaumātua and had one-on-one interviews with rainbow community members.

56.     Targeted engagement was facilitated by Age Concern, Toa Pacific, New Zealand Indian Senior Citizens Association, Hindu Elders Foundation Inc and The Selwyn Foundation to ensure we heard the diverse voices of older Aucklanders.

57.     Over 3,000 people shared their vision for an Age-friendly Auckland and told council what actions they think will support older people to live full, active and healthy lives. The results of previous research and community engagement is provided as Attachments B and C.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

58.     During our engagement we heard, particularly from kaumātua, that environmental wellbeing was missing from the WHO framework. The wellbeing of the natural environment is important to our own wellbeing, and we have a role in looking after our environment in all its forms.

59.     In response, we have expanded the existing WHO Domain Outdoor Spaces and Buildings to include Te Taiao (the natural environment), to recognise that the environment’s wellbeing and our own are connected.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

60.     This Action Plan includes actions developed with CCOs including Auckland Transport.

61.     The Seniors Advisory Panel acted as kaitiaki throughout the process, providing advice, guidance and feedback and contributing to workshops and action planning sessions.

62.     The Seniors Advisory Panel will continue to provide support and guidance on the Action Plan as it is delivered.

63.     Auckland Council, Seniors Advisory Panel and CCOs are aware of the impacts of the Action Plan and their role in implementation.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

64.     Local boards have a strong interest in the wellbeing of older people. All local boards have outcomes that foster social inclusion and participation among their residents, and many have age-friendly specific goals and actions.

65.     Community engagement was held at locations across the region in 2019-2020, from Warkworth to Pukekohe.

66.     Two reports were produced on the findings, the Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Report (Attachment B) and the Community Engagement Findings Report (Attachment C). These were shared with elected members, stakeholders, and the community.

67.     Staff attended local board workshops in August and September 2021 to share the draft Action Plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

68.     The Action Plan is relevant to Māori as tangata whenua and kaitiaki of the sky, land and sea and supports the Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome within the Auckland Plan 2050.

69.     In the 2018 Census older Māori made up over four per cent of the Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland over-65 population.

70.     Older Māori have lower levels of equity, income and rely heavily on superannuation. Actions that are focused on kaumātua delivered by Māori organisations and others will make a positive impact on wellbeing.

71.     The involvement of kaumātua, whānau and organisations has been influential on the design of the Framework, work on implementation; and ensuring this is a living document.

Engagement to better understand the needs of kaumātua and Te Ao Māori

72.     To ensure the Action Plan is relevant and effective for kaumātua, mana whenua and mataawaka were invited to a dedicated hui in February 2020. The hui was organised in partnership with Te Kōtahi a Tāmaki and hosted at Manurewa Marae.

Recognition of tangata whenua, hauora Māori concepts and Te Tiriti o Waitangi are important to kaumātua

73.     Kaumātua also told us:

·   Importance of building and marae accessibility – safety of our kaumatua.

·   Utilising marae more e.g., events, programmes, line dancing, tai chi, learning Te Reo.

·   Age-appropriate housing design.

·   More disability parking.

·   More Te Reo visible everywhere.

·   Environmental recognition – care for Papatūānuku and te taiao incorporated into plan.

·   Sport and recreation options available for older people and open areas for activities.

·   Affordable digital communication.

74.     Te ao Māori values from the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s (IMSB) Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau are also imbedded in the Framework:

·   Whanaungatanga (Develop Vibrant Communities), in relation to the different opportunities to engage and participate in their own and other cultures.

·   Rangatiratanga (Enhance Leadership and Participation), in relation to the activities under Respect and Social Inclusion.

·   Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life), in relation to the Action Plan’s outcome of improving the hauora of older Aucklanders.

·   Wairuatanga (promoting distinctive identity), in relation to valuing and protecting Māori heritage and Taonga Māori.

·   Kaitiakitanga (ensuring sustainable futures), in relation to protecting Te Taiao now and in the future.

75.     These values underpin the way people and organisations will work together to deliver this plan with, and for, our communities.

76.     The Action Plan supports the IMSB’s Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021 by addressing social, cultural, environmental and wellbeing for Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau.

77.     The Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework incorporates the WHO framework, Te Whare Tapa Whā and te ao Māori. The unique Framework contributes to the awareness, education and understanding of Māori perspectives. 

78.     Mana whenua and mataawaka will have an opportunity to provide further feedback during public engagement on the Action Plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

79.     The Action Plan has been designed to be delivered within the existing budgets and resources of council, CCOs and sector partners.

80.     Where additional investment is desired by Auckland Council to implement new or joint actions this will need be considered through Long-term Plan or Annual Plan processes.

81.     There are no financial implications to the local board for any decisions to support the Action Plan.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

Risk

Mitigation

Adoption of a new plan may create expectations that there will be additional budget to support age-friendly outputs.

All public-facing communications and guidance about the new plan will reference that actions will be funded from existing budgets. Where new funding is required, this will be sought through grants and processes such as the long-term plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

82.     Public engagement for the Action Plan is expected to be completed by the end of September 2021.

83.     A summary of all feedback, including from local boards, and a final Action Plan will be reported for adoption by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in November 2021.

84.     Following adoption of the Action Plan, staff will seek membership to the WHO network.

85.     An annual progress report will provide details on the impact and success of our actions. This will include an update on the delivery of actions against the identified measures of success, high-level wellbeing indicators and examples of good and promising practice. This will be presented to the Governing Body, the WHO and shared with all organisations supporting delivery. 

86.     The Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan will be reviewed every five years.

87.     Baseline research was carried out in 2017 - The Older Aucklanders: A Quality of Life Status Report. The research is across the domains that contribute to quality of life and wellbeing. This research is being conducted this year and will be carried out every five years to help monitor progress and guide the development of future actions.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau (draft) (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Report (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Community Engagement Finding Report (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Cleo Matthews - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2021/12785

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend Auckland Council’s bylaw and associated controls about animals before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls, staff have prepared feedback summary and deliberation reports.

3.       The proposal seeks to improve the current Bylaw and controls to better minimise animal-related risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places.

4.       Council received responses from 189 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised by proposal and other matters as following:

Topic

Description

Proposal 1

Require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required).

Proposal 2

Incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property.

Proposal 3

Update the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls.

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that the feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 29 October 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      receive the public feedback on the proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls in this agenda report

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

The Animal Management Bylaw enables council to regulate the keeping of animals

8.       Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 / the Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) and associated controls (controls) seek to minimise animal-related risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places.

9.       The rules are enforced by the Licensing and Regulatory Compliance unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

10.     The Bylaw and controls are one part of a wider regulatory framework, including the:

·     Animal Products Act 1999 and Animal Welfare Act 1999 for animal welfare

·     Resource Management Act 1991 and Biosecurity Act 1993 to protect the environment

·     Dog Control Act 1996 and Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2019 for the care and control of dogs.

Council proposed amendments to improve the Bylaw for public feedback

11.     On 27 May 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to improve the Bylaw and controls for public consultation (Item 11, GB/2021/50).

12.     The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Bylaw (see figure below).

13.     The proposal seeks to better regulate the keeping of animals by:

·     requiring an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required)

·     incorporating rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property

·     updating the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls to make them easier to read and understand.

14.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 177 people and 12 organisations.

 

 

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

15.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

16.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

17.     The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·     indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

·     recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area partly supports the proposal

18.     A total of six people from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal via online and email feedback:

·      for Proposal One, there was majority opposition from the local board area, with less support than the total support from all people who provided feedback

·      for Proposal Two, there was split support from the local board area, with less support than the total support from all people who provided feedback

·      for Proposal Three, there was majority support from the local board area, similar to the total support from all people who provided feedback.

 

Support of proposal in the local board area

Topic

Local board area feedback

Auckland-wide feedback

1:        Require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required).

17 per cent support

0 per cent opposed (want more rules)

50 per cent opposed (want less rules)

17 per cent ‘other’

17 per cent no response

34 per cent support

6 per cent oppose (want more rules)

48 per cent oppose (want less rules)

10 per cent ‘other’

2 per cent no response

2:        Incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property.

33 per cent support

17 per cent opposed

17 per cent ‘other’

33 per cent no response

62 per cent support

15 per cent oppose

12 per cent ‘other’

11 per cent no response

3:        Update the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls.

50 per cent support

0 per cent opposed

17 per cent ‘other’

33 per cent no response

64 per cent support

10 per cent opposed

15 per cent ‘other’

11 per cent no response

19.     Key themes from feedback from people in the local board area are consistent with key themes from all public feedback. For example, that the proposal should:

·     allow more hives than the proposed two

·     have a more graduated approach rather than one limit

·     consider the environmental impact of bees.

20.     The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

21.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23.     The proposal impacts council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance team who implement the Bylaw. The unit is aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

24.     The Bylaw is important to local boards as a topic of high community interest.

25.     Local board views were sought on a draft proposal in March and April 2021. The draft was supported in full by 13 local boards and with suggested changes by seven local boards. One local board opposed the proposal for public consultation.

26.     A summary of local board views and changes made to the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 11 May 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda (Attachment B to Item 11, page 101).

27.     This report provides an opportunity for local boards to provide views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.     The Bylaw has significance to Māori as kaitiaki of Papatūānuku.The proposal supports the key direction of kaitiakitanga in the Independent Māori Statutory Board Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau by minimising the misuse of council-controlled public places.

29.     The proposed amended bylaw also supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance by clarifying how the Bylaw applies to Māori and papakāinga. For example, the proposal clarifies that limits on the ownership of animals in urban areas do not apply to papakāinga within the Māori Purpose Zone of the Auckland Council Unitary Plan.

30.     Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

31.     The majority of people identifying as Māori who provided feedback support Proposals Two and Three (consistent with the overall public feedback). The majority of people identifying as Māori who provided feedback opposed Proposal One (consistent with the overall public feedback).

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

32.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33.     The following risk has been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people.

The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.

This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

 

 

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34.     On 29 October 2021 the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015’ diagram in Context).

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Public feedback from people in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Saralee Gore - Policy Advisor

Breanna Hawthorne - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to make a new Public Trading Events and Filming Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2021/12903

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback and provided a structure for deliberations.

3.       The proposal helps to minimise safety risks, nuisance and the misuse of council-controlled public places (for example footpaths, local parks and civic spaces) by continuing to regulate trading, events and filming activities.

4.       Council received responses from 75 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic

Description

Proposal 1

Continue to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw.

Proposal 2

Clarify the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are.

Proposal 3

Clarify which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw.

Proposal 4

Update the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations, and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 20 October 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

 

 

 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      receive public feedback on the proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui 2022 / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 in this agenda report

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in (c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw regulates trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places

8.       The current Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 / Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Hokohoko, Whakahaerenga i ngā Wāhi Tūmatanui 2015 seeks to protect public safety, minimise nuisance and misuse of council-controlled public places caused by trading activities, events and filming.

9.       The rules are enforced by the Licensing and Regulatory Compliance Unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

10.     The current Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework that includes the:

·    Reserves Act 1997, Resource Management Act 1991, Food Act 2014, Road User Rule 2004, Trespass Act 1980, Fair Trading Act 1986, Customer Guarantees Act 1993, Electricity (Safety) Regulations 2010 and Auckland Unitary Plan

·    Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013, Signage Bylaw 2015, Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 and Waste Management and Minimisitaion Bylaw 2019

·    Auckland Transport Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015.

11.     The current Bylaw will expire on 26 February 2022 and council must adopt a new bylaw before that date to avoid a regulatory gap.

Council proposed a new bylaw for public feedback

12.     On 27 May 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 (Bylaw) for public consultation (GB/2021/51).

13.     The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

14.     The proposal helps to minimise safety risks, nuisance and the misuse of council-controlled public places (for example, in local parks, reserves and civic spaces) by:

·    continuing to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw

·    clarifying the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are

·    clarifying which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw

·    updating the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

15.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 59 people and 16 organisations. In addition, the ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage received 525 hits.[3]

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

16.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

17.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

18.     The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·   indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

·   recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area supports the proposal

19.     A total of one person and one organisation from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal via online and email feedback. There was split support for Proposals One and Two and majority support for Proposals Three and Four. All Proposals had similar support to the totals from all people who provided feedback.

Support of proposal in the local board area

Proposal

Total support from local board area

Total support from people across Auckland

1:        Continue to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw.

50 per cent support

50 per cent ‘other’

66 per cent

(40/61 submitters)

2:        Clarify the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are.

50 per cent support

50 per cent against

74 per cent

(46/62 submitters)

3:        Clarify which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw.

100 per cent support

75 per cent

(44/59 submitters)

4:        Update the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

100 per cent support

83 per cent

(48/58 submitters)

20.     Key themes from feedback from people in the local board area are consistent with key themes from all public feedback. For example, that the proposal:

·    should encourage better enforcement of the rules

·    requires outdoor display of goods to obtain an approval like outdoor dining.

21.     The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

22.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24.     The proposal impacts the operation of several council departments and council-controlled organisations. This includes Auckland Council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance Unit, Events in Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships Unit, Alcohol Licensing and Environmental Health Unit, Auckland Unlimited (previously known as Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development), and Screen Auckland. These teams are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

25.     The proposal may also impact the Auckland Transport Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015. Auckland Transport is aware of the proposal. Auckland Transport has also made council aware of Auckland Transport’s review of its bylaw.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

26.     The proposed new bylaw impacts on local governance as it regulates trading, event and filming activities in council-controlled public places, for example local parks.

27.     Local boards views were sought on a draft proposal in April 2021. The draft was supported in full by 13 local boards and with suggested changes by eight local boards.

28.     A summary of local board views and changes made to the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 11 May 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda, page 191 (Attachment B to Item 12).

29.     This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

30.     Māori have strong bonds to the land as kaitiaki. The proposal supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau by minimising the misuse of council-controlled public places and facilitating opportunities for Māori business owners.

31.     The proposed rules for trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places apply to activities undertaken by Māori, particularly major or international events.

32.     Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

33.     Those submitters who identified as Māori supported Proposals One, Three and Four which is consistent with the overall percentage of the Auckland-wide feedback. Comments included that the proposed regulation seems sensible and provides appropriate balance between mitigating risks and enabling businesses to operate. While the support for Proposal Two was split, submitters agreed that rental micromobility should remain regulated.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35.    The following risks have been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.

The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.

This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

36.     On 20 October 2021, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to make the new Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022’ diagram in Context).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Bylaw Panel Deliberations Report (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Public feedback from people in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Magda Findlik - Principal Policy Analyst

Sam Bunge - Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2021/13284

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed amendments to the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback and provided a structure for deliberations.

3.       The proposal helps to protect the water and water networks from damage misuse and interference and assist in the provision of reliable, safe, and efficient water and wastewater services in Auckland.

4.       Council received responses from 46 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic

Description

Proposal 1

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the Water Supply Network

Proposal 2

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised discharges to the Wastewater Network

Proposal 3

Clarification of linkages to other legislation, bylaws, and other documentation

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 5 November 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      receive public feedback on the proposal to amend the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 in this agenda report

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in (c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

 

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw protects the water supply and wastewater networks

8.       The Governing Body adopted the Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para 2015 / Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) on 25 June 2015 (GB/2015/62). This Auckland Council Bylaw is administered by Watercare Services Limited.

9.       This Bylaw seeks to protect the water supply and wastewater networks by:

·    requiring authorisation from Watercare to connect to or disconnect from the water supply or wastewater network and enabling Watercare to refuse connections where there is insufficient network capacity

·    ensuring appropriate standards for any new infrastructure under Watercare's control

·    protecting the quality of the water supply and prohibiting illegal use from hydrants

·    managing work near the water supply and wastewater network to protect it from damage

·    allowing for restricting the water supply to maintain enough drinking water, in the event of drought or other emergency

·    managing inflows and illegal dumping of material into the wastewater network to avoid wastewater overflows.

10.     The Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework. Issues related to access to private property are addressed under the Local Government Act 2002 while those related to the compliance with water quality are addressed under the Health Act 1956.

11.     In addition, uniquely to Auckland, Watercare has a contractual relationship with its customers. This enables the Bylaw to focus on matters relating to the impact of household and businesses’ behaviours on the public assets, while the customer contract addresses the rights and obligations for each customer’s water and wastewater connection.

Council proposed amendments to the Bylaw for public feedback

12.     On 25 February 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal make amendments to the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw for public consultation (GB/2021/11). The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

 

 

 

13.     The proposal helps to clarify and further define the rules in the Bylaw by clarifying:

·    the rules around the unauthorised taking of water from the water supply network

·    the definitions around unauthorised discharges to the wastewater network

·    linkages with other bylaws and documentation.

14.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 43 people and 3 organisations. In addition, the ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage received 396 hits.[4]

Process to amend Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

 

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

15.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

16.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

17.     The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·   indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

·   recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local board area supports the proposal

18.       No public feedback was received from the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area. There was majority support for Proposals One, Two and Three, from all people who provided feedback across the Auckland Region.

 

Support of proposal in the local board area

Proposal

Total support from people across Auckland

1:        To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the network

70 per cent

2:        To further define the rules regarding unauthorised discharges to the Wastewater network

79 per cent

3:        Clarification of linkages to other legislations, bylaws, and documentation

76 per cent

19.     The full proposal be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

20.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22.     The Bylaw impacts the operations of many Watercare teams in charge of the operations and the planning of water sources and water and wastewater networks. It also impacts some Auckland Council teams involved in compliance and stormwater management. Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

23.     Local Board members were invited to give feedback on the Bylaw in December 2019. This included an offer by staff to present workshops to interested local boards at their meetings.

24.     Communication was received from one local board in relation to wastewater overflows, a matter unrelated to Bylaw, and already covered by the Resource Management Act 1991.

25.     This low interest in the Bylaw review is consistent with the Auckland Council’s classification of the Bylaw as low impact and low interest to local boards under the agreed principles and processes for Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019.

26.     An update on the findings and options stages were included in Watercare’s Local Board communications in June 2020.

27.     This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.     The Bylaw contributes to the Māori Plan’s key directions and aspirations of Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life "Satisfaction with our environments and standard of living") and Kaitiakitanga (Ensure Sustainable Futures "lntergenerational Reciprocity") by ensuring the public water supply and wastewater network is future proofed and not contaminated or damaged, which would be detrimental to the people and the natural environment.

29.     Input by mana whenua was sought at a special hui of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in January 2020. The main concerns related to environmental issues beyond the bylaw scope such as archaeological sites and clarifications of asset ownership and responsibilities.

30.     Staff sought input by mana whenua on the proposed options in June 2020. A meeting with the Chair of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum confirmed his support of the direction taken and recommended a written update at the June forum to carry on the engagement.

31.     Watercare staff presented an update of the Bylaw review process to the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in mid-October 2020.

32.     Those respondents who identified as Maori during the public consultation were all generally supportive of the three proposals.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

33.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consulative procedure will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34.     The following risks have been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.

The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.

This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

 

 

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

35.     On 5 November 2021, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to make the amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015’ diagram in Context).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Bylaw Panel Deliberations Report (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Sharon Danks – Operations Delivery Manager – Watercare

Authorisers

Mark Bourne – Chief Operations Officer – Watercare

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi

File No.: CP2021/13377

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board feedback on the draft Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The BID Team has implemented a review of the Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2016) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi and supporting documents, as advised in the memo to local board members dated 23 April 2021. The memo can be found on the Auckland Council website, InfoCouncil.

3.       The review sought informal and formal feedback from local boards, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, council-controlled organisations (CCOs), council departments and other external stakeholders.

4.       The review has focused on strengthening those parts of the policy relating to issue resolution and, following local board feedback, the financial sustainability of BID programmes.

5.       The review also focused on elected member needs and identifying any political risks and mitigations.

6.       The draft BID Policy (2021) has been discussed with the Finance and Performance committee at a workshop on 18 August 2021. Feedback received has been incorporated into this version of the BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

7.       Staff are now seeking formal feedback from local boards on the draft BID Policy (2021) provided as Attachment A.

8.       Following formal feedback received from local boards, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, CCOs, council departments and other external stakeholders, the final version of the BID Policy (2021) and support documents will be presented to the Finance and Performance Committee for adoption on 9 December 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      provide formal feedback on the draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) and supporting documents by 1 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Overview of the Auckland BID programme

9.       BID-operating business associations are membership-based organisations independent of Auckland Council. The draft BID Policy (2021) supports the independent nature of the BID-operating business associations. They are responsible for the BID programme delivery, its success, and are accountable to BID members/BID affiliates.

10.     Local boards have the primary relationship with BID-operating business associations in their area:

·        Local boards and business associations have a vested interest in a particular place and share similar goals. Working collaboratively achieves greater outcomes.

·        Local boards have significant allocated decision-making responsibility for BID programme establishments, amending existing BID programmes, BID boundary changes, continuation/discontinuation and issue resolution.

11.     Auckland Council requires BID-operating business associations to fully comply with the Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (Kaupapa Hereā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi) (refer Attachment A).

12.     The BID policy sets out the process for:

·        establishing, continuing/discontinuing BID programmes

·        changes to the BID programme boundary area/map

·        changes to the BID targeted rating mechanism

·        issue resolution

·        key stakeholder roles and responsibilities.

13.     The BID policy includes the engagement and reporting requirements for BID-operating business associations to ensure all BID members/BID affiliates have access to the relevant BID programme information. BID-operating business associations must use their Annual General Meeting (AGM) process to obtain formal member approval for the BID programme delivery, budget, and to confirm their BID targeted rate grant amount for the following financial year.

14.     The BID policy describes the balance between the independence of the BID-operating business association and the accountability role council has for monies collected as a public sector organisation. This balance is necessary to sustain public trust and confidence with the Auckland Council BID programme. 

The review

15.     Commencing April 2021, the review of the current policy began with communicating with local boards and all stakeholders involved in the management and operation of BID programmes across Tāmaki Makaurau. This included both BID-operating and non-BID business associations, council departments and interested parties. The process to date has included informal feedback and comments on the current policy.

16.     The review process focused on strengthening parts of the policy (and updating supporting documents) relating to issue resolution and, following local board feedback, financial sustainability of BID programmes.

17.     The review has also provided the opportunity to clarify the documentation between Auckland Council (collecting the BID targeted rate and the funder) and the BID-operating business association relating to the BID Programme Agreement (2016) document.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Rationale for the review

18.     The primary objective for reviewing the current 2016 policy is a focus on the issue resolution sections. Experience in this space over the last five years has illustrated gaps in the usefulness of the current policy to address and resolve issues in a timely manner.

19.     The review provided an opportunity to update parts of the policy relating to Auckland Council changes in operation, current business practices and where the advancement of technology has contributed to how business is done, for example, online meetings.

20.     There was also an early opportunity to capture informal feedback from local boards and BID-operating business associations.

21.     The information and informal feedback collected in May, June and July of this year has been incorporated into the draft BID Policy 2021 and supporting documents (Attachments A, B and C). A summary of the BID Policy (2021) requirements is provided with this report (Attachment D).

22.     BID programmes are operated by independent business associations, and their programmes and services are provided according to their members’ stated priorities. In recognition of their independent status, the BID policy does not prescribe standards for programme effectiveness. That is a matter for business association members to determine. Staff, therefore, cannot base recommendations on these factors, but only on the policy’s express requirements.

Participants in the review

23.     In addition to local boards, there are a range of stakeholders involved in BID programmes, both internal and external to Auckland Council. The BID team set a programme of informal engagement, outlined in Table 1 below:

Table 1 – Key engagement activity

Stakeholder

Engagement

Dates

BID-operating business associations

Business associations without BID programmes

BID communication including newsletters and emails:

Sent to 50+ BID-operating business associations and other interested parties

March, April, May, June and July 2021

Three network meetings

May, June and July 2021

An average attendance exceeded 20+ BID-operating business associations

Four special workshops - topics included: issue resolution, conflict of interest and developing a board charter

June and July 2021

An average of 23+ BID programmes were represented at each workshop.

Local boards

18 local board workshop presentations

June and July 2021

Introduction memo and BID policy review information

Three special topic workshops - topics included: issue resolution, conflict of interest and developing a board charter

June and July 2021

An average of 16 local board elected members attended each workshop

Local Board Services Department Lead team

Presentation and information feedback received

Presentation on 18 June 2021

Finance and Performance Committee

Memo on BID policy review project

April 2021

Council departments including:

·    Legal Services

·    Connected Communities

·    Ngā Mātārae

·    Risk and Assurance

·    Finance and Policy

·    Local Board Services

Regular meetings, engagement and feedback

May, June, and July 2021

Independent polling agent

 

Engagement and feedback regarding the ballot/polling process

June 2021

Finance and Performance Committee workshop

The draft BID Policy (2021) V1 and support documents were presented and feedback received

18 August 2021

24.     The process to undertake the review of the current policy (2016) takes place from February 2021 to June 2022. Progress to date is set out in Table 2 below:

Table 2 - Progress to date

Date

Progress

2021

Feb/March

·    Project planning, stakeholder communications

April to July

·    Directed consultation with local boards and stakeholders on the current BID policy and identified themes

  issue resolution

  conflicts of interest

  board charter development

May/June

·    Cross council, external engagement and feedback

June/July

·    Draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents created

August 18

·    Finance and Performance Committee workshop

August/September

·    Distribution of draft BID Policy (2021) for formal feedback

Informal local board feedback

25.     Discussions with local boards during workshops centred around:

·        issue resolution – how to do this fairly and in a timely manner

·        operational issues – relating to management and governance of BID-operating business associations

·        opportunities for collaboration and cost savings between BIDs

·        elected members involvement with BID-operating business associations

·        growth opportunities for BID-operating business associations

·        continued dependence on local board funding.

Seeking local board formal feedback on the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

26.     Local boards are now being asked to provide formal feedback on a revised draft policy (2021) and support documents (Attachments A, B and C). Local boards are encouraged to engage with BID-operating business associations in their local board area (where relevant/possible) to help to inform this feedback process. 

27.     Any feedback from local boards will help the further development of BID Policy (2021). It would be, however, particularly useful to get local board views on proposed changes set out in Tables 3 and 4 below.

28.     Feedback from local boards, external stakeholders and any further feedback from BID-operating business associations will be reviewed by staff and this will help inform the final version of the policy. Formal feedback can be sent to bids@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz.

Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

29.     Once the BID Policy 2021 is approved, other support material will be made available on the BID Auckland Council website www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz and include:

·        BID-operating business association constitution (template 2021)

·        BID-operating executive committee board charter (template 2021)

·        individual BID programme area maps

·        BID affiliate/BID business association membership qualification diagram

·        local board BID representative position description

·        template documents, including:

o   AGM agenda

o   AGM minutes

o   BID programme income and expenditure budget (for BID grant of $120,000).

Summary of changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

30.     The key proposed changes incorporated into the draft BID Policy (2021) are set out in Table 3:

Table 3 - Key changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

Key change from current policy

Description

Note

2021 section, page

Issue resolution

 

Improving the ability to resolve issues with a clear process in a timely manner

An issue is identified as non- compliance with the BID policy

3.5, Requirement 24

BID Programme Funding Agreement (2021) Attachment B

Replaced BID Programme Agreement (2016)

Clarifies the relationship between the parties

3.1, Requirement 18

Size and scale of BID programmes

Minimum BID targeted rate grant $120,000

No change from 2016

Minimum BID targeted rate grant $120,000 remains

A new requirement for legacy BID programmes (11 in total) that currently receive less than $120,000pa to increase their targeted rate up to that amount over the next five years

A variety of options are suggested to achieve this

This requirement is a result of local board feedback on concerns to continually fund non-financially sustainable BID programmes

 

1.4, Requirement 3 and 4

Exceptional or unexpected circumstances

Council may, at its discretion, depart from the requirement set out in section 2.4 (25% of total voting forms must be returned for the ballot to be valid

Council will consider evidence of support to date, what is fair and any impact from amending the voting threshold mandate

 

3.4.2

BID operating business association constitution (template 2016)

This supporting document was included as part of the current policy and now removed from the BID Policy (2021)

This allows the business association to amend their constitution to suit their local needs, on the basis it’s not inconsistent with the BID policy

A template document is provided on the www.bid.auckland.govt.nz website

1.1, 2.3.2 Requirement 12

BID operating executive committee board charter (template 2016)

This supporting document was included as part of the current policy and now removed from the BID Policy (2021)

This allows the business association to amend their board charter to suit their local needs, on the basis it’s not inconsistent with the BID policy

A template document is provided on the www.bid.auckland.govt.nz website

1.1, 2.3.2 Requirement 12

31.     Minor changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) are set out in Table 4 below:

Table 4 - Minor changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

Minor changes to current policy

Description

Note

2021 section, page

Other council funding

 

Organisational view on risk regarding BID-operating business association receiving other council funding

The draft BID policy acknowledges other council funding grants allocated to BID-operating business associations

2.3.4, Requirement 16

Local boards – other roles

 

Updated

Refer to elected member conflicts of interest policy

A link to these documents can be found here

2.5.3

BID Annual Accountability Report (2021) Attachment C

Name change from BID Annual Accountability Agreement (2016)

To include BID targeted rate grant amount and copy of AGM resolution

3.2, Requirement 22, Table 2, item 9

Audit – provision for a review audit or full audit

Recognition of increased risk and increased reporting requirement based on the amount of targeted rate received

Set as a sliding scale

BID targeted rate grants less than $200,000pa must commission a review audit

BID targeted rate grants more than $200,000pa must commission a full audit

3.2, Requirement 23, Table 2, item 4

Rating mechanism - flat rate

Lifted the maximum flat rate amount from $500 to $900 per rateable property

To provide more flexibility for BID-operating business associations when considering BID programme budgets and the impact of BID targeted rates on ratepayers

3.1.2

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

32.     The BID Policy (2021) focuses on the governance and accountability for BID-operating business associations. Individually the BID programme, through targeted rate-funding, can focus on advocacy and activities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

33.     Formal feedback will be sought from other council teams including CCOs and those who work and have an interested in the BID programme and business community space.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

34.     Local boards have engaged with the review of the BID Policy (2016) and their informal feedback has been incorporated into the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents. Table 1 outlines local board engagement to date.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

35.     Officers are working with Auckland Council’s Ngā Mātārae Unit to ensure that the BID Policy (2021) aligns with the Auckland Council Māori Responsiveness Framework. 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36.     There are no financial implications for local boards under the draft BID Policy (2021).

37.     Targeted rates for BID-operating business associations are raised directly from commercial ratepayers in the district and used by the business association for improvements within that rohe. The council’s financial role is to collect the BID targeted rates and pass them directly to the association every quarter.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38.     There are no direct financial risks to the local board or the council that could result from the draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

39.     The policy describes the balance between the independence of the BID-operating business association and the accountability for monies collected by a public sector organisation.

40.     The draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents set out the requirements and obligations for BID-operating business associations and are intended to help minimise the potential for business associations to misuse BID targeted rate funds by requiring each BID to plan for their intended use, report on its activities to its members, and to undertake and meet all requirements set out in the policy.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41.     Following formal feedback received from local boards, CCOs, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, council departments, other external stakeholders and those with an interest in BID programmes, the final BID Policy (2021) and support documents will be updated and the steps outlined in Table 5 below will be completed by the BID team:

Table 5 - Progress to completion

Date

Progress

2021

August

·    Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents updated to post Finance and Performance Committee workshop feedback

Mid-August to 1 October

·    Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents distributed to local boards, BID-operating business associations, council departments, CCOs and other stakeholders for formal feedback

·    Update www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz website with feedback link

·    Feedback open 24 August to 1 October

October

·    Update draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents incorporating formal feedback

9 December

·    Presentation of final version of BID Policy (2021) and support documents to Finance and Performance Committee meeting

2022

January/February

·    Post Finance and Performance approval actions, communications with local boards, BID-operating business associations, all stakeholders, and update www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz website

March to June

·    BID Policy (2021) communication, support and advice

·    The BID team will provide assistance to the 50 BID-operating business associations to comply with the BID Policy (2021), including guidance with aligning their individual constitutions and governance documents to meet the timing of their 2022 AGM timeframes

42.     The BID Policy (2021), if approved by the Finance and Performance Committee in December 2021, would become operational on 1 July 2022. 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft BID Policy (2021) (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

BID Funding Agreement (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

BID Annual Accountability Report (Under Separate Cover)

 

d

Draft BID Policy requirements (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Claire Siddens - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Local board feedback on Auckland Transport's Parking Strategy Review

File No.: CP2021/13520

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on Auckland Transport’s Parking Strategy Review.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Auckland Transport (AT) is currently reviewing its Parking Strategy (2015). The AT Parking Strategy sets out the objectives, principles and policies relating to AT’s management and supply of parking across Auckland.

3.       Since 2015, there have been numerous changes in the local government setting. These require realignment of policy.

4.       This report gives an overview of the approach being taken to the Parking Strategy review, including how staff are engaging with local boards.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the review of Auckland Transport’s Parking Strategy by 30 September 2021, ahead of public consultation on the review.

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       The AT Parking Strategy was developed subsequent to local government amalgamation, bringing together one regional strategy and set of policies for all AT managed parking.[5]

6.       The current strategy was released in 2015 and is provided as Attachment A. The policies cover:

·    management of on-street and off-street parking

·    regulation methods (including pricing)

·    parking permits and coupons

·    comprehensive Parking Management Plans

·    parking for different types of transport

·    event management

·    technology for parking management

·    Park and Ride provision and pricing

·    compliance and enforcement

7.       The Parking Strategy has worked well over the last seven years. It has led to various changes and successes such as:

·    business/centre parking areas implemented

·    residential parking schemes rolled out and expanded due to their success and popularity

·    demand-responsive, priced parking implemented successfully, helping to manage parking demand and keep parking spaces turning over and available for customers

·    a consistent approach applied across the region to parking issues, and a transparent approach.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The AT Parking Strategy needs to be reviewed

8.       Since the AT Parking Strategy was developed in 2015, there have been a number of changes to policy and planning, as well as changes in the Auckland setting. Examples include:

·    adoption of the Auckland Unitary Plan. Development signalled in the Unitary Plan will enable growth that may be difficult to service with public transport, meaning that some new suburbs will rely on car use for access

·    market demand is pushing for more housing provision and density. Development is already showing evidence of less car-parking provision and more issues with car-parking compliance

·    changes to travel behaviour, such as emergence of micro mobility (scooters etc) and the growth of the delivery economy

·    Auckland’s public transport network has matured over time, providing opportunities for further passenger uptake and efficiency related to park and ride management

·    Auckland’s Climate Plan (and coming government strategy) will require changes to the land transport system, including parking

·    of particular relevance is the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). This guides direction on urban development through district planning. The NPS-UD requires council to remove parking minimum requirements from the Unitary Plan. This means that developments will not be required to provide onsite parking. This will contribute to society and transport becoming less car-centric over time, however, it will lead to increasing pressure on public parking resources, particularly kerbside parking.

Developing a next-generation parking strategy

9.       The overall approach that AT is taking to the review is to:

·    realign the Parking Strategy objectives and outcomes with the central and local government policy and planning context

·    discover and understand key issues for parking through focussed discussions with elected representatives, subject matter experts, industry representatives, partners and stakeholders

·    fill any gaps with new policies (including those focus areas below)

·    re-engage with Aucklanders on parking

·    develop a strategy that is practical to implement.

10.     The review will also focus on three key areas where there is a known need for improvements and updates to policies and guidelines. These include:

·    Park and Ride - planning for growth and provision and managing demand

·    Kerbzone optimisation – developing a framework to manage the space between the kerbside lane and adjacent land uses

·    Comprehensive Parking Management Plans - these are parking management plans for more localised areas - we are reviewing the framework and guidelines to develop these.

What we are asking of local boards

11.     Parking roles and responsibilities provide an important context for understanding how parking is managed and how to have best effect in appealing or advocating for change.

12.     Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, AT is responsible for all parking within the road reserve. AT manages a number of off-street carparking sites on behalf of Council, by delegation. In addition, AT manages Park and Ride sites. Auckland Council owns all underlying land assets.

13.     We have reviewed local board plans, giving us some insight into how parking issues impact each local board area. Common themes are the desire for more Park and Ride and bike parking, as well as managing parking as part of new developments.

14.     The recent Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) consultation also received feedback from local boards on the topic of enhancing Park and Ride facilities.

15.     Auckland Transport welcomes further local board discussion and input to the Parking Strategy review. We are keen to hear from local boards, what outcomes we should be aiming for and also what specific issues the strategy should address.

16.     Local board feedback will enable us to shape the draft refresh of the Parking Strategy prior to public consultation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17.     Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri:Auckland’s Climate Action will require changes to the land transport system, including parking.

18.     Government strategy and direction will also require changes, particularly the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) which requires planning decisions to contribute to the development of urban environments that support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and are resilient to the likely current and future effects of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19.     Auckland Transport have engaged with key stakeholders and across the Auckland Council family, including with council’s Advisory Panels.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

·    June 2021- introductory memo to local boards to introduce the Parking Strategy review and approach

·    June 2021- presentation to the Local Board Chairs’ Forum to introduce the Parking Strategy review and discuss plans for local board engagement

·    August 2021- workshops with those local boards who elected to have a workshop before public consultation questions, raise ‘pain-points’ and gauge any initial feedback (PowerPoint provided as Attachment B)

·    September 2021 – opportunity to provide formal feedback ahead of public consultation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22.     AT is engaging with the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum to establish how best to incorporate views from Mana Whenua and mataawaka into the review.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

23.     There are no financial implications associated with the local board providing feedback on the review of AT’s Parking Strategy.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

24.     The direction taken by the updated Parking Strategy will include what levers should be pulled, how far they should be pulled, and how fast.

25.     Lower levels of intervention, undertaken more slowly, will allow more incremental change, and plenty of time for Aucklanders to adapt, but will take longer to achieve the shifts that Auckland needs.

26.     More intervention, implemented more quickly will require significant changes in behaviour but will be a quicker route to the eventual outcome of a city that is less dependent on cars.

27.     Each of these approaches will have their own risks and necessary mitigations.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28.     Feedback from local boards ahead of public consultation is required by 30 September 2021.

29.     Public consultation will take place in October/November 2021. 

30.     Following consultation, all local boards will receive a summary of data and comments received during public consultation.

31.     Those local boards who elected to have their workshop after public consultation have these booked in for February 2022.

32.     Following these workshops, all local boards will have a further opportunity to provide formal feedback.

33.     The final updated Parking Strategy is expected to go to the Planning Committee for adoption in May 2022, after which local boards will be provided with a final copy of the strategy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Transport Parking Strategy (2015)

99

b

Parking Strategy – PowerPoint presentation to local board workshops

139

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Local board feedback on the kerbside refuse charging mechanism policy

File No.: CP2021/13384

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek formal feedback from local boards on the kerbside refuse charging model policy review.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council is currently committed to expanding the pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) funding model for kerbside refuse collection across the Auckland region. This reflects the policy within our Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 to provide consistent waste services across the region.

3.       This would involve moving the legacy Auckland City Council and Manukau City Council areas away from a rates-funded service to a PAYT funding model.

4.       Before we make this shift, Waste Solutions is reviewing the evidence to support the decision to move these areas to a PAYT model to assess whether PAYT is still the best solution for achieving the objectives of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

5.       Evidence gathered so far is being assessed against three options:

·   all areas pay-as-you-throw (PAYT)

·   keeping a hybrid model (currently, 55 per cent of the region’s refuse collection is rates-funded, 45 per cent PAYT)

·   all areas rates-funded.

6.       The options will have a different impact on each local board area, depending on the current service charging mechanism relative to the proposed service change (Attachment A).

7.       A memo was circulated to all local boards on 23 July 2021 (Attachment B) outlining initial conclusions reached through the analysis of evidence gathered to date. This memo was marked confidential, but the need for confidentiality has now lapsed. This was used as a basis for discussion with local boards at workshops throughout August 2021 to understand their views on the risks and impacts of the potential options within their respective areas.

8.       This report seeks formal feedback from local boards, using the template in Attachment C as a guide, to inform the recommendation that staff will present to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the kerbside refuse charging model policy review.

Horopaki

Context

9.       The 2012 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) made provision to move all Auckland households towards a user-pays charging system for refuse collection, known in Auckland as pay-as-you-throw (PAYT). This transition to a consistent regional PAYT refuse service (weekly, changing to fortnightly over time) was confirmed in WMMP 2018.

 

10.     The decision was based on:

·   best evidence at the time that this was the most effective way to incentivise diversion from landfill and enable householders to reduce their waste costs

·   the understanding that technology would be available to enable pay-per-lift charging through radio-frequency identification (RFID) chipped bins.

11.     In legacy rates-funded areas, it was decided that the move to PAYT would take effect after the introduction of a food scraps collection service, to reduce the financial impact on households.

12.     Since then, more information has become available about the effectiveness of PAYT, particularly in the context of the other complementary services that the council has rolled out, for example regionwide recycling and the pilot food scraps service, due to be rolled out regionwide from early 2023. Prior to making the change to PAYT, Waste Solutions is reviewing the evidence base for this shift.

13.     In this review we are assessing several factors, including:

·   the potential effects of each funding model on communities

·   the potential waste minimisation impacts of each funding model

·   the expected cost to implement each funding model taking into account the changing financial circumstances of both ratepayers and council.

14.     To assist with this review, Waste Solutions commissioned independent consultants, Morrison Low, to examine the evidence currently available against the following aspects of the refuse collection service and its impact on the council, customers and the environment:

·   waste minimisation

·   cost effectiveness

·   reputation

·   technology

·   household responsibility / accountability

·   access / equity

·   downstream impacts on the collections industry

·   climate change

·   amenity

·   health and safety.

 

15.     Evidence gathered so far is being assessed against three options:

·   all areas PAYT

·   keeping a hybrid model (currently 55 per cent rates-funded, 45 per cent PAYT)

·   all areas rates-funded.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16.     Currently, 55 per cent of Auckland households (legacy Auckland City and Manukau City) are provided with a rates-funded refuse service, with the remaining 45 per cent (legacy Franklin, Waitākere, Papakura and North Shore City Council) on a PAYT service provided by either the council or a private operator. There is no council refuse collection service in legacy Rodney, but under current policy there is a commitment to provide a PAYT service in the future. See Attachment A for a breakdown of council refuse collection services by local board area.

17.     Detailed analysis and advice were provided to local boards in a memo dated 23 July 2021 (Attachment B). This memo was marked confidential, but the need for confidentiality has now lapsed.

 

 

Conclusions on key issues

18.     Aotearoa/New Zealand is unique in having side-by-side competition between private and council services in the residential refuse collection market. This impacts the way PAYT operates and introduces a number of challenges not experienced overseas.

19.     Financial modelling currently indicates that PAYT is less cost-effective for the council than rates-funded solutions because of more complex systems, duplication of workloads by multiple suppliers and the council’s need to offer the service to properties across the entire region.

20.     Evidence from overseas found only a very weak link between marginal pricing changes and change in refuse quantities. This is consistent with a 2021 examination of refuse tonnages, which found no clear evidence that PAYT areas of Auckland produce less refuse per capita than rates-funded areas.

21.     The current price in Auckland does not appear to be a sufficient economic driver to motivate behaviour change in households.

22.     International evidence indicates the greatest waste minimisation is achieved through providing easy access to services that divert waste away from landfill (such as the recycling and food scraps collection services), good community education programmes, and reduced access to refuse volume to encourage use of the diversion services.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23.     Enhancing access to diversion and resource recovery, along with optimising efficiencies around collecting refuse at the kerbside, presents opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions directly, for example through the reduction of vehicle movements and diversion of organic material from landfill, and indirectly by encouraging better resource use.

24.     Therefore, considerations to take into account when assessing options include the opportunities to minimise both direct and immediate impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, for example: 

·   emissions can be mitigated where the council retains greater control over household behaviour and container size (larger customer base), to drive higher participation rates from households in the weekly food scraps service which is critical to reducing methane emissions from landfill

·   emissions can be mitigated by choosing the option that will bring efficiencies to vehicle servicing routes. This includes reducing duplication of refuse collectors operating side-by-side in the same areas of Auckland.

25.     The rates-funded option provides the opportunity to reduce total truck kilometres travelled from a sole supplier, the ability to specify the truck requirement through the procurement process and efficiencies in route design.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26.     This review is about the way in which council charges for domestic kerbside rubbish collections and so views have not been sought from the wider council family.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

27.     Local boards provided feedback through the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 development process. All local boards supported the proposed WMMP. Only Devonport-Takapuna, Manurewa, Ōrākei and Papakura Local Boards expressed views on refuse charging mechanisms within their responses.

28.     Staff provided a detailed memo to all local boards on 23 July 2021, outlining the early findings of the review, acknowledging that detailed works on costs and equity were still being completed.

29.     Staff attended workshops with local boards between 29 July and 24 August 2021 to present on the key points of the review and seek views on the current refuse collection services. Informal feedback was noted during these workshops.

30.     This report seeks formal feedback from the local board using the template provided in Attachment C to inform the recommendation to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31.     Mana whenua and mataawaka were engaged in the development of the 2018 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan and identified priority actions for Māori.

32.     The council partners with Para Kore ki Tāmaki – a Māori-developed and implemented programme that integrates mātauranga Māori and zero waste principles and practices to support marae, Māori organisations, Kura Kaupapa Māori and Kōhanga Reo to divert significant quantities of recycling and organic waste from landfill.

33.     Staff outlined the purpose of the review and early findings to the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Regional Hui on 9 July 2021 and then at a Regional Projects Workshop on 20 July 2021. Members of the forum receiving the presentation raised concerns that poorer communities had fewer choices in relation to controlling their waste production. Staff acknowledged that this was recognised by Waste Solutions and that multiple approaches are needed, including advocacy to central government on phasing out hard-to-recycle plastics and the introduction of product stewardship schemes.

34.     Staff are also working with specialist community facilitators Rākau Tautoko and Waste Solutions community partners to hold targeted focus groups with Māori and Pacific communities during August and September 2021 to seek their views on different refuse collection payment mechanisms. These views will inform the recommendation to Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35.     In terms of cost-effectiveness, when comparing rates funded with PAYT models, the Morrison Low study concluded that the rates-funded option provides greater cost-effectiveness for the council than both the current hybrid model and the PAYT option due to economies of scale.

36.     This was based on:

·   cost: results of financial modelling commissioned by the council, using existing parameters and the weekly PAYT service, show that the cost of delivering a rates-funded service is similar, but costs the community significantly less overall when all service costs, including private collection costs, are included.

·   cost sustainability: an estimated variation in cost per pickup based on the number of customers serviced by Auckland Council which shows that the cost of operating the council service increases sharply when the council is servicing less than 30 per cent of the community. At 30 per cent, it is approximately double the cost per pickup compared to 80 per cent.

37.     Further analysis of costs is being carried out by council staff as part of this discovery phase.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38.     High level risks are outlined in Table 1. More detailed risks and mitigations will be examined as part of the development of options for Environment and Climate Change Committee throughout September.

Table 1: Kerbside refuse charging policy review high level risks and mitigations

Risk

Mitigation

The perception of unfairness in offering the same service/charge to all households: households that produce large amounts of waste are favoured under the rates-funded model, whereas households that produce less waste are favoured under the PAYT model.

Staff are investigating the cost of offering three different bin sizes (80l/120l/240l) under the rates-funded model to accommodate different households’ needs.

There is no agreement on which charging model works best for the whole of Auckland

Consideration of a hybrid model will be presented as part of the options analysis to Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021. 

The preferred option costs council more to deliver than the current hybrid option.

Detailed costs will be provided for all three options. These will be presented at workshops with elected members and local board chairs as part of the Annual Budget 2022/23 process. This will include analysis of the cost to the community and an estimate of the cost of failing to meet Auckland’s climate change goals.

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39.     Staff are currently engaging with elected members, local boards, industry and community groups, prior to developing options and recommendations to take to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for a decision on 14 October 2021.

40.     Local board feedback received by 28 September will help inform the recommendation, and will be included within the report.

41.     In addition to the above, the following studies are currently underway, or have recently concluded: 

·   radio-frequency identification (RFID) trial to show whether this service will be able to be operated at scale, with a sufficiently low error rate to be considered feasible in Auckland

·   detailed analysis of costs of all options

·   investigation of the social impacts of the three options.

42.     The results of these studies will conclude the desk-based discovery phase and will inform the final evaluation of options by Morrison Low. This final report will help to inform the recommendation that will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

43.     If the Environment and Climate Change Committee decide to deviate from current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan policy by approving either the rates-funded or hybrid model option, the current proposal is to engage more widely on options through a special consultative procedure as part of the Annual Plan 2022/2023 process.

44.     Local boards will be consulted on the preferred option, which will include a more detailed analysis of the timings of any changes to service, during that process.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Current refuse services and impact of options by local board area (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Memo Kerbside Refuse Charging Review (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Template for local board feedback – refuse charging (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Sarah Le Claire - Waste Planning Manager

Authorisers

Parul Sood - Manager Waste Planning

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Addition to the 2019-2022 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board meeting schedule

File No.: CP2021/13120

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve three ordinary or extraordinary meeting dates to be added to the 2019-2022 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board meeting schedule in order to accommodate the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the 2019-2022 meeting schedule on 4 December 2019 (resolution MO/2019/194).

3.       At that time, the specific times and dates for meetings for local board decision-making in relation to the local board agreement as part of the Annual Budget 2022/2023 were unknown. 

4.       The local board is being asked to approve three meeting dates as an addition to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board meeting schedule so that the modified Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes can be met.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      approve the addition of three ordinary or extraordinary meeting dates to the 2019-2022 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board meeting schedule, to be held at the  Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board office, 93 Bader Drive, Mangere or via Skype for business to accommodate the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes as follows:

·    Wednesday, 1 December 2021, 5.00pm

·    Wednesday, 11 May 2022 at 5.00pm

·    Wednesday, 22 June 2022, 5.00pm.

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) have specific requirements regarding local board meeting schedules.

6.       In summary, adopting a meeting schedule helps meet the requirements of:

·    Clause 19 Schedule 7 of the LGA on general provisions for meetings which requires the chief executive to give notice in writing to each local board member of the time and place of meetings. Such notification may be provided by the adoption of a schedule of business meetings.

·    Sections 46, 46(A) and 47 in Part 7 of the LGOIMA requires that meetings are publicly notified, agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting and that local board meetings are open to the public.

7.       The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted its 2019-2022 business meeting schedule at its 4 December 2019 business meeting (resolution MO/2019/194).

8.       The timeframes for local board decision-making in relation to the local board agreement, which is part of the Annual Budget 2022/2023, were unavailable when the meeting schedule was originally adopted.

9.       The board is being asked to make decisions in early December 2021, and early May and mid-June 2022 to feed into the Annual Budget 2022/2023 process. These timeframes are outside the board’s normal meeting cycle. 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10.     The local board has two choices:

·        option 1: add the meetings as additions to the meeting schedule

·        option 2: add the meetings as extraordinary meetings.

11.     For option 1, statutory requirements allow enough time for these meetings to be scheduled as additions to the meeting schedule and other topics may be considered as per any other ordinary meeting. However, there is a risk that if the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes change again or the information is not ready for the meeting, there would need to be an additional extraordinary meeting scheduled.

12.     For option 2, only the specific Annual Budget 2022/2023 topic may be considered for which the meeting is being held. There is a risk that no other policies or plans with similar timeframes or running in relation to the Annual Budget 2022/2023 process could be considered at this meeting.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

13.     This decision is procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decision’s implementation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

14.     There is no specific impact for the council group from this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

15.     This report requests the local board’s decision to schedule additional meetings and consider whether to approve them as extraordinary meetings or additions to the meeting schedule.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

16.     There is no specific impact for Māori arising from this report. Local boards work with Māori on projects and initiatives of shared interest.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

17.     There are no financial implications in relation to this report apart from the standard costs associated with servicing a business meeting.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

18.     If the local board decides not to add this business meeting to their schedule, this will cause a delay to the Annual Budget 2022/2023 process which would result in the input of this local board not being able to be presented to the Governing Body for their consideration and inclusion in the budget.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

19.     Implement the processes associated with preparing for business meetings.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Renee Burgers - Lead Advisor Plans and Programmes

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Local board resolution responses, feedback and information report

 

File No.: CP2021/12000

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       This report provides a summary of resolution responses, local board feedback and information reports for circulation to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board.

Information reports for the local board:

2.      Kaipātiki Local Board’s August 2021 business meeting requested a copy of the following resolution be forwarded to all local boards for their information (Attachment A).

a)      Item 15 – Proposal to make a new Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw

.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)         note Kaipātiki Local Board’s August 2021 business meeting resolution (Attachment A).

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Kaipātiki Local Board’s August 2021  business meeting resolution

167

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

 

15

Proposal to make a new Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw

 

Eric Perry, Local Area Manager, was in attendance via Skype for Business to address the board on this item.

 

 

Resolution number KT/2021/131

MOVED by Chairperson J Gillon, seconded by Member M Kenrick:  

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      provide the following general feedback on the draft Statement of Proposal in Attachment A of this agenda report to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Noho Puni Wātea ā-Waka 2022 / Auckland Council Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022:

i)       support all reserves being excluded from the bylaw and remaining prohibited under the Reserves Act 1977,

ii)      support Auckland Council not using the bylaw to manage issues associated with homelessness and support Auckland Council’s commitment to a compassionate enforcement approach to protect vulnerable Aucklanders,

iii)     express concern that all land held by Auckland Council under the Local Government Act (including the road corridor) is proposed to be available for freedom camping (unless specified as prohibited) rather than appropriate locations being specifically identified in the bylaw, and note that this is a significant change from the existing bylaw where freedom camping is prohibited unless specified,

iv)     do not support freedom camping being allowed by default in all road corridors in Auckland, as this will put added pressure on arterial and suburban roads and potentially allow freedom camping in:

A)     carparks servicing neighbourhood shops,

B)     slip roads servicing private driveways,

C)     carparks servicing public transport, such as ferry terminals

D)     carparks servicing parks and reserves (where outside the reserve boundary)

E)      pocket parks and paper roads

F)      outside schools, early learning centres and kindergartens.

b)      support the use of general rules for all areas where freedom camping is permitted, as proposed in the draft Statement of Proposal in Attachment A, and support the following options:

i)       General rule 1: Self-containment rule - Option C, that freedom camping vehicles must be certified self-contained, help to prevent toilet waste, and cooking and washing wastewater being left behind.

ii)      General rule 2: Maximum stay rule – Option B, maximum one night stay, to help ensure a turnover of carpark spaces, and minimise conflict with other users of the area/neighbours.

iii)     General rule 3: Set departure time rule – Option B, 8am departure time, to help ensure a turnover of carpark spaces, and minimise conflict with other users of the area/neighbours.

iv)     General rule 4: No-return period rule – Option C, No return to the same street/parking area within 4 weeks, to ensure fair access to the area,  help make it easier to enforce, and minimise conflict with other users of the area/neighbours.

c)      request that the Governing Body consider the following additions to “Schedule 2: Designated areas where freedom camping is prohibited”:

Prohibited area

Location

Reason for prohibition

The gravel carpark near the southern end of Colonial Road, Birkenhead (commonly assumed to be part of Chelsea Estate Heritage Park)

Colonial Road, Birkenhead

To protect access to the area as this area provides access to the pond and is a track entry-point and provides into Chelsea Estate Heritage Park.

To protect the health and safety of the people that visit the area which provides carparks for Chelsea Estate Heritage Park.

There have been previous issues with freedom-campers in this location.

The carparks at the end of Exmouth Road, Northcote (commonly assumed to be part of Heath Reserve)

Exmouth Road, Northcote

To protect access to the area as this area provides access to both Heath Reserve and Tuff Crater Reserve.

To protect the health and safety of the people that visit the area which provides carparks for Heath Reserve and Tuff Crater Reserve.

 

All marked carparks at the western end of Beach Haven Road in the vicinity of Beach Haven Wharf, and the access road to the wharf

Beach Haven Road, Beach Haven

To protect access to the area as this area provides carparks and access to Beach Haven Wharf, Hilders Park recreation wharf, Hilders Park and Larkings Landing Reserve.

All marked carparks at the southern end of Queen Street in the vicinity of Te Onewa (Northcote) Wharf

Queen Street, Northcote

To protect access to the area as this area provides carparks and access to Te Onewa (Northcote) Wharf.

All marked carparks within the road corridor of College Road between Kilham Ave and Ernie Mays St, that form part of the wider south-western Northcote Town Centre carpark

College Road, Northcote

To protect access to the area as this area provides carparks to service the Northcote Town Centre.

To protect the health and safety of the people that use the carparks to access the Northcote Town Centre.

All marked carparks at the Rawene Road carpark, Birkenhead

Lot 4 DP 63458

Part Lot 2 DP 233

To protect access to the area as this area provides carparks to service the Birkenhead Town Centre.

To protect the health and safety of the people that use the carparks to access the Birkenhead Town Centre.

All carparks at the carpark behind the Sunnyhaven Ave shops that services the shops and Opaketai Beach Haven Gardens

Lot 2 DP 51878

Pt Lot 12 DP 43175

Lot 1 DP 51878

To protect access to the area as this area provides carparks to service the Sunnyhaven Ave shops and Opaketai Beach Haven Gardens.

To protect the health and safety of the people that use the carparks to access the Sunnyhaven Ave shops and Opaketai Beach Haven Gardens.

All formed carparks designed to service neighbourhood shops and businesses, including (but not limited to):

·    Birkdale Rd shops,

·    Chartwell Rd shops,

·    Chivalry Rd/Diana Rd shops,

·    Glenfield Rd/Wairau Rd shops (portion of carpark),

·    Levesque Rd shops,

·    Manuka Rd shops,

·    Moore St shops,

·    Pupuke Rd shops,

·    Rangatira Rd/ Lysander Cr shops,

·    71 Roseberry Ave,

·    Salisbury Rd shops,

·    Sunnybrae Rd shops,

·    View Rd (western end) shops,

·    View Rd (eastern end)/Wairau Rd shops (portion of carpark)

Multiple locations within the road corridor

To protect access for customers and delivery vehicles to businesses that have varying opening hours from very early to very late.

To protect the health and safety of the people that use the carparks to access the businesses.

 

All slip roads within the road corridor that provide access to private properties, whether they are parallel to roads (for example on Glenfield Road) or across corners/intersections (for example corner of Sunset Rd/Target Rd; corner Mokoia Rd/Colonial Rd)

Multiple locations within the road corridor

To protect access to private properties, including for emergency services.

All carparks servicing community centres/houses, libraries and leisure centres that are on parcels of land held under the Local Government Act, (but not limited to):

·    Lot 1 DP 94804 (ActivZone);

·    Lot 2 DP 79494 (Bayview Community Centre);

·    Part Lot 55 DP 1675 (Birkdale Community Hall);

·    Lot 11 DP 65017, Lot 11 DP 65017, Lot 11 DP 65017, Lot 11 DP 65017, Lot 11 DP 65017 (Glenfield Leisure Centre);

·    Part Lot 2 DP 49045, Part Lot 3 DP 49045, Part Lot 4 DP 49045, Part Lot 5 DP 49045 (Glenfield Library);

·    Pt Lot 12 Blk I DP 804, Lot 13 Blk I DP 804 (Highbury House);

·    Lot 151 DP 49752 (Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust);

·    Allot 651 Psh of Takapuna (NorthArt);

·    Allot 652 Psh of Takapuna, Lot 1 DP 92328 (Northcote Library).

Multiple locations

To protect access to the area for people to access services delivered by organisations that deliver community outcomes for the Kaipātiki Local Board. 

To protect the health and safety of the people that use the carparks to access services delivered by organisations that deliver community outcomes for the Kaipātiki Local Board

 

d)      express concern that any bylaw on freedom camping may not be able to be adequately enforced as there doesn’t appear to be any budget for an enhanced service level of compliance identified in the 10 Year Budget 2021-31.

e)      request the opportunity to speak at the Governing Body Committee meeting on 23 September 2021, noting the local board endorse the Chairperson to speak on behalf of local board members.

f)       request clarification on the process to revise and update both Schedule 1: Designated areas where freedom camping is restricted and Schedule 2: Designated areas where freedom camping is prohibited both prior to and after the adoption of the new Bylaw.

g)      request that this resolution is circulated with all local boards and the North Shore ward councillors.

CARRIED

 

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Workshop Notes

File No.: CP2021/12705

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board workshops held on 11th and 25 August 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       In accordance with Standing Order 12.1.4, the local board shall receive a record of the general proceedings of each of its local board workshops held over the past month.

3.       Resolutions or decisions are not made at workshops as they are solely for the provision of information and discussion. This report attaches the workshop record for the period stated below.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      receive the workshop notes from the workshops held on 11th and 25 August 2021.

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Workshop notes 11 August 2021

175

b

Workshop notes 25 August 2021

177

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

Governance Forward Work Calendar

File No.: CP2021/13129

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board with its updated governance forward work calendar.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The governance forward work calendar for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is in Attachment A. The calendar is updated monthly, reported to business meetings and distributed to council staff.

 

3.       The governance forward work calendar was introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme and aim to support local boards’ governance role by:

·    ensuring advice on meeting agendas is driven by local board priorities

·    clarifying what advice is expected and when

·    clarifying the rationale for reports.

 

4.       The calendar also aims to provide guidance for staff supporting local boards and greater transparency for the public.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a)      note the Governance Forward Work Calendar.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance forward plan work calendar

181

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Janette McKain - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

 


Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator



[1] Statistics New Zealand, 22.9% (163,161) estimated in 2017

[2] Ministry of Social Development. Briefing to the Incoming Ministers, October 2014, p.31. 

[3]     ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage ’hits’ comprised of 54 ‘engaged’ participants (people who completed the online survey), 134 ‘informed’ participants (people who downloaded a document, visited a FAQ page or multiple project pages, or completed the survey) and 337 ‘aware’ participants (people who visited at least one page).

[4] ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage ’hits’ comprised of 43 ‘engaged’ participants (people who completed the online survey), 88 ‘informed’ participants (people who downloaded a document, visited a FAQ page or multiple project pages, or completed the survey) and 265 ‘aware’ participants (people who visited at least one page).

[5] Management of Council parking is not covered by the 2015 Parking Strategy, unless Council has specifically delegated management to AT.